Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Annual Reviews in Control

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/arcontrol

Microgrid control: A comprehensive survey T

Sachidananda Sen , Vishal Kumar
⁎

Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Uttarakhand 247 667, India

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Present researches in power and energy fraternity are driven towards the realization of smart grid (SG) tech-
Droop control nologies. Microgrids (MGs) being regarded as “elementary units” of SG, has undergone rigorous research for
Energy management system more than one and a half decade now. It provides an integration platform for microsources (MSs), loads, storage
Microgrid devices and power electronics (PE) converters at demand premises forming a system of systems i.e. SoSs ar-
Power sharing
chitecture. MGs mostly operated in grid-tied mode but during an emergency, are capable of standalone opera-
Smart grid
Voltage and frequency control
tion. Stability and operational control during both the modes are of utmost concern. Involvement of several
control functionalities viz. normalcy of voltage and frequency, optimal power sharing, islanding detection etc.,
had been adhered in the literature. In spite of that, the real world implementation has not been of significant
extent, that too even is far from having ideal MG characteristics, eligible for commercial usage. These technical
obstacles need to be identified and dealt with. This paper provides a comprehensive survey of different control
aspects of MGs, broadly classified under four control strategies: centralized, decentralized, distributed and
hierarchical frameworks. Each scheme is reviewed in detail w.r.t the principles behind, their applicability and
performances. It also identifies several research gaps and future trends therein. The technical barriers for real
scale application and their solutions are also briefly discussed. And finally, a discussion on different integrated
technologies for MGs, to realize SG features is also presented.

1. Introduction Lehn, 2005).

The microgrids (MGs) paradigm are not only economical, resilient
and reliable but also, provides environmental benefits as compared to
the existing utility networks because of the use of renewable energy
resources (RESs). At 2.5% annual load growth (Annaswamy, 2013), a
huge unmatched gap arises in between demand and conventional
power generation. Also, transmitting power to remote demand sites
incurs huge losses. The MGs with features of quick installation and at
demand proximity makes it a viable solution for the present energy-
related problems. The RESs viz. intermittent sources (solar photovoltaic
(PV) cells and wind turbines), microturbines, fuel cells along with diesel
generators are mostly used in the MGs (Hatziargyriou, 2014).
The intermittency and different generation characteristics require
the microsources (MSs) to be placed on low voltage (LV) distribution
feeders via storage devices (flywheel, battery and super capacitors) and
power electronics interfacing (PEI) (mostly dc-ac or ac-dc-ac con-
verters). Combination of each of these is also known as distributed
energy resources (DERs). Along with various DERs and loads (con-
trollable, shiftable and critical), as well as a specified control archi-
tecture, forms the complete MG framework (Katiraei, Iravani, &
After the deregulated restructuring of power system (PS), penetra-
tion of DERs is increasing at steady pace. Though it brings lots of
benefits, it is also accompanied by several challenges. Firstly, the LV
networks are getting converted from passive to active. Secondly, in-
crease in complexity due to the use of PE converters. Thirdly, DERs with
different generation attributes i.e. hybrid, ac and dc create problems in
voltage and frequency regulation. Lastly, two possible modes of op-
eration i.e. grid-tied and islanded modes. These difficulties related to
MG infrastructure, calls for a proper control architecture so that smart
grid features can be realized (Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue, 2017; Majumder,
2010).
As several control aspects are involved in MG, the literature avail-
able is quite extensive. Different functionalities viz. droop control,
voltage and frequency regulation, proportional active and reactive
power sharing, energy management system (EMS), MG optimization
and multi-MGs interaction etc. being the fundamental and important
issues for MG operation, are given the utmost priority. Because of MGs’
system of systems (SoSs) architecture these control requirements can be
fulfilled by using any established control system design strategies i.e.
centralized, decentralized, distributed and hierarchical frameworks.

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: sachi.dee2015@iitr.ac.in (S. Sen), vksaxfee@iitr.ac.in (V. Kumar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2018.04.012
Received 14 March 2018; Received in revised form 24 April 2018; Accepted 24 April 2018
Available online 07 June 2018
1367-5788/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Sen, V. Kumar
Later, the smart grid (SG) functionalities can be built upon these MGs
control infrastructure (Martin-Martinez, Sánchez-Miralles, &
Rivier, 2016).
Though a few review literature on MG control are available, they
are not so comprehensive. A concise discussion on central controllers
for MGs are presented in Dragicevic, Lu, Vasquez, and Guerrero (2016),
Kaur, Kaushal, and Basak (2015). Similarly, Eid, Rahim, Selvaraj, and
Khateb (2016), Guerrero, Chandorkar, Lee, and Loh (2013), gives a
brief review on decentralized control techniques. A few distributed
control schemes were discussed in Yazdanian and Mehrizi-Sani (2014).
While in Bidram and Davoudi (2012), Canizares (2014), some appli-
cations on hierarchical control schemes are discussed. Some review
works are also available on MGs as a specific control function viz.
power sharing (Han et al., 2016), voltage and frequency control
(Malik, Ai, Sun, Zhengqi, & Shupeng, 2016). Most of these review lit-
erature discusses the principles behind these control strategies, how-
ever, fails to document the reported works completed in this field. Some
works compiled only a specific functionality and a few presents on the
basis of MG type i.e. ac, dc and hybrid. As a systematic and detailed
state-of-the-art comprehensive survey is lacking, this article brings to-
gether under one cover, a plethora of available MG control strategies
considering various important operational functionalities, designed
using both classical and modern control principles. Thereafter, several
future trends and research challenges for MGs’ real scale implementa-
tion are also suggested. Along with that, role of MGs and some in-
tegrating devices for realizing smart grid concept is also discussed. This
article would assist smart grid researchers to have knowledge of ex-
isting control foundations realized and thereafter, building smart grid
features upon them.
The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 briefs about MG ar-
chitecture and control requirements. Section 3 gives the level based
classification of MG control techniques. The MG control literature is
addressed in Section 4. Several research challenges are presented in
Section 5, discussions on smart grid realization are covered in Section 6
and Section 7 concludes the paper.
2. Microgrid architecture and control requirements
MGs are strategic entities located in the LV distribution network. It
is connected to the grid supply point (GSP) or the MV/LV substation at
a single bus called point of common coupling (PCC) through circuit
breaker or static transfer switch. It is controlled to switch between two
modes of MG operation. A central controller for the whole MG is placed
on LV side of GSP and it is known as microgrid central controller
(MGCC) as shown in Fig. 1. It takes care of the power flow between the
upstream utility network and MG, cost optimization of MG and deciding
mode of operation and islanding detection. Various types of MSs and
storage units are connected to LV radial feeders through PEI and MS
controllers (MC). The loads are also distributed along the feeders via
load controllers (LCs) for individual or aggregated loads
(Hatziargyriou, 2014).
The MG control functional requirements for economical and reliable
working can be formulated as:
• Regulation of voltage and frequency (V-f) within limits;
• Efficient load sharing i.e. active and reactive power (P-Q) balance
and proper communication among DERs;
• Seamless transition between two modes of operation i.e. proper
synchronization and early islanding detection;
• Economic dispatch of the DERs units by optimization to reduce MG
running costs;
• Power flow control between MG and PS network i.e. an energy
management system (EMS).
119
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Fig. 1. Microgrid architecture.
3. MG control: classification and functional layers
Since its inception, several MG control techniques have been re-
ported in the literature. As discussed in the introduction section, MG
control systems can be broadly divided into four types: centralized,
decentralized, distributed and hierarchical framework. In this section, a
further detail on functional layers under each head is presented. It is
important to note that, there is no unique control strategy for a specific
MG, as it depends upon the MG model, its configuration, and compo-
nents used.
The centralized control scheme is usually implemented for small
MGs. State variables information from component level sensors are
collected at MGCC via a high speed communication channel. The MGCC
is responsible for processing and decision making as per status of the
state variables. The control law or set points for each LCs are sent
through the same two-way high-BW link. These LCs adjust their re-
sponse as per new command. For grid-tied MGs and multi-MGs systems,
there is another controller in the distribution system. Hence, the central
control strategy can be further divided into a three-layer structure
based upon the number of components and area brought under control
i.e. distribution system management (DSM), MGCC and LCs.
The decentralized control method uses local measurements and
based upon pre-defined algorithms embedded in them, it decides action
at the component level. Considering the fact of SoSs architecture of
MGs, multi-agent system (MAS) is best way to implement decentralized
control method. This control scheme mainly has two-stage architecture,
mostly named as upper/higher and lower level controllers.
Decentralized control is usually applied to the high rated MGs with
large number of components where the centralized control structured
would be of sluggish nature (due to collection and processing of huge
data at one location i.e. PCC). Though it is debatable that which one
between centralized and decentralized architecture is better, both the
methods have their own advantages and disadvantages depending upon
operational scenario within the MGs. Table 1 presents a comparative
summary.
The distributed control architecture is an improvisation of decen-
tralized technique, where each LCs communicate with its neighboring
ones (through low-BW channels in a collaborative manner) to attain
some advantages of centralized architecture meant for the whole MG. It
means, each device is controlled based upon local measurements by
taking account of neighbors’ response. It not only preserves the au-
tonomy of each controller but also, simultaneously achieves the global
optimization by dividing a large problem into several sub-problems.
MAS is the most sophisticated tool for implementing this scheme where
S. Sen, V. Kumar Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151

Table 1 4.1. Droop control

Centralized vs decentralized control.
Factors Centralized control Decentralized control 4.1.1. Centralized control technique
Droop control of MGs is a concept where the conventional power
DG ownership Single owner Multiple owners system (CPS) is imitated i.e. when demand for active power increases,
Goals A clear single task Uncertain tasks
the frequency falls and vice-versa. Similar relations are observed be-
Operating personnel Available Not available
Flexibility Less More
tween the reactive power and voltage. Now, as CPS consists of huge
Market participation Complex algorithms, all Simple algorithms, Some synchronous machines with large inertia, this functionality is auto-
units collaborate competitive matically accomplished. But, for MGs mostly inverter interfaced sources
Plug-and-play Not possible Possible are used and hence, need for separate droop control is inevitable.
Optimality Optimal solutions Suboptimal usually
Although droop control is a component level functionality, centralized
Expansion Troublesome Easy
Communication needs High Low control technique has also been applied in some of the available works.
Setup cost High Low A centralized droop control scheme for parallel operation of DERs in-
More critical operation Possible Not possible verters under both grid-tied and islanded operation is proposed in
Failure occurs If one faulty point Many points faulty
Tan, Peng, So, Chu, and Chun (2012). In grid-tied mode, the controller
operates in current control mode, while in islanding operation it works
as voltage control mode. A model predictive control (MPC) strategy is
each controller is considered as an intelligent agent. It also has a three-
used and the complete problem is segregated into two sub-problems as
layered structure: droop/lower, secondary/intermediate and auxiliary/
transient and steady state. This leads to faster parallel computations
upper. As this control scheme incorporates the advantages of both
and reduced response time. But, as Kalman filters were integrated for
central and decentral architecture, it is the most exploited one in lit-
generating the controller references, overall design complexity is quite
erature.
high.
Hierarchical control structure is based upon the difference in time
In Yao et al. (2013), a MG having resistive feeders is used to im-
scales of various control requirements. It is derived from ANSI/ISA-95
plement the reverse droop control scheme i.e. P-V and Q-f based. The
(International Society of Automation) which is a standard meant for
MGCC is designed to control the parallel operation of inverters, along
interface or interoperability among different enterprise and control
with usage of active compensator/filters to eliminate the circulating
systems. It is also divided into three-level structure: primary, secondary
currents. Classical PI controllers were realized and three MG operating
and tertiary. The primary layer is meant for instantaneous control of the
modes of were studied. It not only accomplishes the task of droop but
MGs’ device level state variables viz. V-f regulation. It operates in
also, maintains system stability all operating modes. The control laws is
milliseconds and seconds time interval. The secondary control layer is
(1):
slower (within minutes) for eliminating steady-state deviations arising
from action of primary layer. The tertiary or auxiliary layer is the Vi = Vi* m (Pi Pi*) + Vt
slowest one (several mins to an hour) and manages power flow/ex- fi = f i* + n (Qi Qi*) + ft (1)
changes with the upstream utility grid. It implements the economic
dispatch and optimization of overall MG system. with deviation given as:
Distributed and hierarchical control strategies complement each
Vt = Kpv (Vgrid Vmg ) + Kiv (Vgrid Vmg ) dt
other. Both need same kind of communication and control infra-
structure. Fig. 2 shows complete MG control structure. ft = Kpf ( grid mg ) + Kif ( grid mg ) dt (2)

For parameter definition and values refer Yao et al. (2013).

4. Microgrid control
This section presents a detailed survey of important control objec-
tives for MGs viz. droop control, V-f control, P-Q sharing, EMS and
several other miscellaneous functions accomplished using aforemen-
tioned four categories of control architectures. Each of the control
functionalities is discussed in a structured comparative manner, with
some critical comments on benefits and limitations of each of the
control techniques.
4.1.2. Decentralized control technique
This control scheme is mostly exploited for implementing the droop
control for MGs. Early works in Guerrero, Matas, Vicuna, Castilla, and
Miret (2007) gives a novel decentralized strategy for parallel working
of inverters in an islanded MG. The LV feeders were considered to be
resistive and hence, conventional droop control is not applicable. The
controller performs the V-f control as well as P-Q power sharing using
three nested loops: (1) output voltage regulating inner loop; (2) output
resistive impedance loop; and (3) outer loop for P-Q sharing. It suggests

Fig. 2. Classification of microgrid control techniques and functional layer structure.

120
S. Sen, V. Kumar
a P-V droop and Q-ω boost scheme using two PD controllers to satisfy
the parallel inverters operational requirements. This controller is able
to mitigate harmonic imbalance and provide increased damping, hence,
is widely accepted. The droop equations are given as:
dP
V = V* nP nd
dt
dQ
= * mP md
dt (3)
Thereafter, a decentralized droop strategy for a LV dc MG is pro-
posed in Khorsandi, Ashourloo, and Mokhtari (2014). It takes into ac-
count the effects of unequal feeder resistances and state-of-charging
(SoC) of the battery energy storage systems (BESSs) in presence of solar
PVs based sources. Three modes of operation and fault conditions are
considered, to represent perfect power sharing among the DERs. Clas-
sical PI controllers were used to realize the scheme, various tests sug-
gest a smooth operation of the MG with insignificant error in power
sharing. However, it didn't discuss its applicability towards ac MGs. In
Gavriluta et al. (2014), a customized droop scheme combining dc-bus
signaling (DBS) and droop concepts for multi-terminal dc (MTDC)
networks is presented. Five operating bands viz. normal, safety (high
and low) and critical (high and low) similar to normal, alert and
emergency of power system is considered. The SoC of storage units and
dc-bus voltage were also included to create a two-variable droop sur-
face for controlling BESSs. It protects the batteries from overcharge and
deep-discharge.
The economic operation of MG, which is generally realized in sec-
ondary level control can also be achieved by the primary level adaptive
droop control strategy as discussed in Oureilidis and Demoulias (2015).
Here, impedance of the MG as measured by each DERs are used to
adjust the droop coefficients. DERs nearby the loads provides most of
the power than farther ones. Hence, as the current is flowing through
least impedance path, transmission power loss is reduced. It also de-
couples the active and reactive power (P-Q), therefore, avoids con-
trolling of the DERs virtual impedance. Effectiveness of proposed con-
troller is tested for both radial and looped MG topologies. This scheme
provides scope for operational optimization of MGs.
A V-I droop characteristic is given in Golsorkhi and Lu (2015). By
this method, the nonlinear power sharing problem is converted to a
simple piecewise linear current sharing. It not only enhances the
damping but also, accuracy of DERs during overloading operations.
Same authors extended this work to improve the power quality of MGs
in Golsorkhi and Lu (2016). Here, MPC combined with V-I droop works
in coordination to prevent active power overloading, mitigate voltage
unbalances by adjusting negative sequence output impedance of MSs
and limiting circulating currents. It tunes the controller parameters
heuristically to reduce the effects of disturbances. However, usage of
GPS for synchronization purposes enhances its overall complexity and
brings reliability issues.
With inclusion of devices having different characteristics within the
MGs, makes the developed droop controllers’ usage inappropriate. This
calls for certain modifications in the droop control strategies. In
Bhattacharya and Mishra (2016), a MG with PVs and electric vehicles
(EVs) as MSs are considered to implement a modified droop control
scheme. During grid-tied mode PV works in MPPT and EVs are charging
but, in islanded mode, constant PQ control is used at ac side for
seamless mode transfer without any control switching. For dc side, a
double quadrant droop scheme is proposed for charging to equalize the
SoCs during vehicle to grid (V2G) mode. This controller has the features
for implementation on a hybrid MGs. Similarly, an adaptive droop
strategy for dc MGs is presented in Sahoo, Mishra, and Padhy (2016).
Solar PVs, fuel cells (SOFC) and BESSs are considered, the charging and
discharging of BESSs is managed using bidirectional adaptive strategy
for proper power sharing. Q. Xu, Wang, Zhang, Wen, and Xiao (2016)
gives a novel droop scheme based upon frequency and incremental cost
(f/IC) of MSs in an autonomous MG operation. At steady state, as ICs of
121
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
all MSs becomes equal in synchronization to frequency, the optimal
economic dispatch of MSs is achieved. Hence, this scheme also helps to
optimize the total operating cost, that too without the use of any
communication. The equations are given as:
fi = fmax mIC ·ICi (Pi )
fmax fmin Ci (Pi )
mIC = with ICi (Pi ) =
fmax Pi (4)
Similarly, in Vu et al. (2017), the droop function for dc MG is rea-
lized using closed-loop reference model (CRM) adaptive control tech-
nique. A time-varying model is derived thereafter, a normalization
method and projection algorithm, with CRM is used to achieve si-
multaneous current sharing, voltage stability. It also suggests an
adaptive gain scheduling procedure. But, its implementation is limited
to dc MGs only. Recently, a new GPS based technique for synchroni-
zation of DERs within islanded MGs is proposed Golsorkhi, Lu, and
Guerrero (2017). Rotating reference frames of MSs controllers are
synchronized, which later, were used for the V-I droop method. Along
with it, an adaptive Q-f droop scheme is realized as a backup in case
there is an interruption in receiving GPS signals. Though this scheme
enhances the controller reliability, however, its implementation com-
plexity and real-scale feasibility are the main concerns.
Another adaptive droop scheme for LV dc MGs based on super-
imposed frequency accompanied with a virtual resistor is proposed in
Peyghami, Mokhtari, and Blaabjerg (2017). Better load sharing and
voltage regulation than conventional droop are achieved using locally
available measurements to adapt the droop gains by introducing an ac
power at both primary and secondary levels. This avoided the need of
any communication infrastructure and hence cost effective. The droop
characteristic is described by (5). Later, the controller parameters are
chosen based upon stability analysis of a developed small signal model.
The main concerns of the proposed method is injection of ac power into
the dc MG, which can deteriorate its power quality and cause stability
problem.
dpk G (s ) Qk
* = V*
V ok Rdk Iok + Iok
Iok
dpk G (s ) Qk
* = V*
V ok R^dk Iok where R^dk = Rdk +
Iok (5)
More detains are given in Peyghami et al. (2017). A novel f-P/Q
based droop control for synchronization and power balance of DERs in
cascaded-type MGs is presented in Sun et al. (2018). It provides the
advantage of its applicability to both resistive-inductive (RL) and re-
sistive-capacitive (RC) type loads and also accomplishes the task of bus
level voltage regulation. However, application of proposed droop
scheme on parallel or interconnected MGs has not been explored.
4.1.3. Distributed control technique
First distributed control scheme for secondary level droop control is
presented in Shafiee, Vasquez, and Guerrero (2012). It attains proper
sharing of reactive power among the DERs. PI control is used to reduce
steady-state deviations in V-f at the secondary level. Thereafter, the
effect of communication delays was studied in comparison to a cen-
tralized secondary method. Benefits of this networked controller it that,
the operation of the whole system doesn't fail for the failure of a single
device and also gives better stability performance.
A distributed average PI (DAPI) droop scheme for power sharing is
given in Simpson-Porco, Shafiee, Bullo, Shafiee, and Guerrero (2013).
The controller developed is robust against small load variations and
maintains system frequency within allowable range by utilizing La-
placian averaging method. It also gives existence conditions for stable
operating points. In Simpson-Porco et al. (2015), same authors extend
this work further and proposes a generalized distributed architecture
for V-f control at secondary level of an autonomous MG. This controller
helps to make intuitive tradeoffs between two conflicting goals of
S. Sen, V. Kumar
voltage regulation and Q sharing. The DAPI based frequency controller
is given in (6).
= * mi Pi +
i i
n batteries and during discharging, these coefficients are set as inversely
d i
ki = ( i *) aij ( i j)
dt j =1
An adaptive droop control scheme is proposed in Nasirian, Davoudi,
and Lewis (2014), where virtual impedances of DERs are controlled by
current regulators to implement proportional load sharing. A PI based
voltage regulator is also introduced to compensate for any voltage
droop due to droop controller. The voltage regulator uses average
voltage value of MG estimated by a voltage observer by using dynamic
cooperative averaging information obtained from neighboring con-
verters. Advantages of this controller lie in the fact that, a sparse cyber
network is used for data exchanges which also aids implementation of
the cooperative algorithm. Similarly, an advanced droop scheme for dc
MGs are proposed in Maknouninejad, Qu, Lewis, and Davoudi (2014).
Here, a nonlinear optimal controller for voltage regulation and power
sharing is presented. The control strategy needs full information of MG
hence, it is converted to a linear near-optimal control problem. The
performance index is given in (7). It is found to be robust, stable and
have better performance than usual droop schemes even for inter-
mittent communication links. Under a special case, the proposed con-
troller can work as conventional droop control strategy hence, is more
reliable. However, it is limited to dc MGs only.
T
J= [Pgi (T ) Pg*i]2 + [ki2 (Pgi Pg*i)2 + ui2] dt
i i
t0
Multi-functional control scheme for coordinated operations of VSIs
in MGs is proposed in Chang and Zhang (2015). It accomplishes pri-
mary droop and secondary control for power sharing and to synchro-
nize the frequency subject to phase angle and voltage constraints. It is
applicable to both radial and ring MGs with resistive/inductive lines.
Linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) concept is used for controller design
which provides smooth operation, robustness against small dis-
turbances. Most appealing feature of this controller is its applicability to
meshed lossy MGs with uneven R/X distribution lines.
A distributed droop control for interconnected multiple dc MGs
forming a networked MG is proposed in Weaver, Robinett, Parker, and
Wilson (2015). It uses the local BESSs for each MSs to actuate the droop
characteristic. The MSs voltages are matched to bus voltage by peri-
odically updating the duty cycle of the dc-dc converters at asynchro-
nous intervals through a feed-forward method. Results suggest a re-
duction in number of storage units’ requirements for maintaining
transient stability. Also, usage of Hamiltonian surface shaping (HSS)
makes tuning of PI controller gains easy to eliminate the steady state
error of the overall system.
A multi-objective cooperative control strategy is proposed in
Lai, Zhou, Lu, Yu, and Hu (2016). It converts the V-f regulation into
pinned synchronize control strategy and P-Q sharing to an average
consensus based problem. Which later, provides the reference set points
for the droop scheme. It uses communication network with switching
characteristics and can handle non-uniform time-varying delays. Sta-
bility analysis is done using Lyapunov–Krasovskii method to obtain
sufficient conditions for network links and upper limit of communica-
tion delays. These criteria make its reliable usage under time-varying
delays.
In Avila and Chu (2016), a new droop control scheme for P-f and Q-
V for primary level of isolated MG is presented. At secondary level, this
simultaneously accomplishes the task of accurate P-Q sharing. The
controller is based upon distributed pinning MAS. The source agents are
chosen as pinning agent i.e. virtual leader while, load agents as reaction
mechanism. This control scheme needs low BW communication chan-
nels. In Gkavanoudis, Oureilidis, & Demoulias (2016), adaptive droop
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
control scheme that balances charging and discharging cycles of dis-
tributed BESSs is proposed. While charging, as frequency of MG in-
creases, the droop coefficients are adjusted proportional to SoCs of
proportional to SoC as in this case system frequency decreases. This
(6) presents an additional degree-of-freedom (DOF), but its efficacy is yet
to be verified. A DAPI based droop is used to study transient perfor-
mance of a multi-inverter MG (Tegling, Andreasson, Simpson-Porco, &
Sandberg, 2016). The power losses due to resistive line, while reg-
ulating the frequency during load or generation variation, acts as small
disturbances of persistent nature. Input-output H2 norm is used to
quantify the transient power losses. A comparison between the pro-
posed DAPI and conventional secondary level droop is also done. Re-
sults shows losses can be reduced by optimal tuning of DAPI and only
low-gain distributed feedbacks can optimize MGs’ transients.
4.1.4. Hierarchical control technique
Applicability of hierarchical control technique do not have much
scope as droop controller hence, its usage is very limited. A two stage
droop controller for current sharing among dc-dc converters in a dc MG
is given in Srinivasan and Kwasinski (2015). The primary layer is
constructed using passivity-based controller that yields virtual resistors
at converter output. At secondary layer, voltage regulator is added
using an integral control, for compensating the steady-state voltage
deviations, and attaining asymptotic stability at local equilibrium
points. Although this technique is able to replicate the static droop
characteristics without any communication links, its usage is confined
to dc MGs only and gives a sluggish response. Table 2 briefly sum-
marizes the droop control techniques.
(7)
4.2. Voltage and frequency control
4.2.1. Centralized control technique
Use of droop controller for proper load sharing among the DERs
leads to persistent small and large fluctuation in system voltage and
frequency (V-f) and this might result into equipment failure, distorted
power quality, stability problems etc. Hence, maintaining the V-f within
operating range is another important control objective for MGs and this
objective can be fulfilled by aforementioned control schemes. In this
regard, early work by Akbari, Golkar, and Tafreshi (2011) proposes a
centralized voltage control method with both ac and dc sources under
grid-tied mode. The PI based controllers were designed for various PE
converters, MSs and storage devices to have a centralized coordination
based control system. This controller has robust capabilities in restoring
voltage stability by taking account of generation uncertainty of MSs.
Thereafter, in Tabrizi, Radman, and Tamersi (2012), voltage profile of
MG under two scenarios: the transition from grid-tied to islanded mode
and for a 3-phase short circuit fault during an islanding operation is
maintained using MG voltage controller (MGVC). The MGCC based
lead-lag controller is designed to function as MGVC. It also supports the
existing reactive power controllers in mitigating voltage deviation
across all feeders and loads. Simulation results show improved voltage
profile for pre- and post-islanding conditions. Fig. 3 depicts structure of
MGCC in a distribution network.
An adaptive controller for under frequency load shedding is pro-
posed in Karimi, Wall, Mokhlis, and Terzija (2017). It includes a state
estimator, as MGs have a limited number of measurement units at some
buses. It helps to compute the power imbalances using power flow
measurements and rate of change of frequency (ROCOF).
The controller has two operating modes: (1) event based meant
during islanding of MG or tripping of a generator. (2) response based
during sudden rise in load demand. It is divided into four modules to
calculate event and frequency, state estimator and load shedding
modules. This modular design can facilitate easy modification of con-
troller task in future. However, usage of distributed state estimator
(DSE) makes it quite sluggish.
122
 Table 2
S. Sen, V. Kumar

Summary of droop control techniques for microgrids.

Design technique Authors Control principle Contribution Comments (Benefits/limitations)

Centralized control (Tan et al., 2012) Model Predictive Control (MPC)
(Yao et al., 2013) Proportional-Integral (PI) control
Decentralized control (Guerrero et al., 2007) Proportional-Derivative (PD)
control
(Khorsandi et al., 2014) PI control
(Gavriluta et al., 2014) Custumized droop control using
DBS
(Oureilidis & Demoulias, 2015) Adaptive droop control
(Golsorkhi & Lu, 2015; M.S. 2016) MPC combined with V-I droop
(Bhattacharya & Mishra, 2016) Modified droop control
(Sahoo et al., 2016) Bidirectional adaptive droop
control
(Q. Xu et al., 2016) Decentralized droop control
(Vu et al., 2017) Closed-loop reference model (CRM)
adaptive control
Complete problem is divided into two subsystems: transient,
steady-state.
Reverse droop (P-V and Q-f) is implemented as the network is
considered to be resistive.
Novel three nested loops for P-V droop and Q-f boost.
Effects of unequal feeder resistances and SoC of BESSs were
included.
A new droop concepts for multi-terminal dc (MTDC)
networks.
Droop coefficients are adjusted using measured impedance of
MG by each of the DERs.
Nonlinear power sharing is converted to simple piecewise
linear current sharing with enhanced power quality.
Double quadrant scheme to include EVs within MGs.
Integrates various RESs (PVs and SOFC) and BESS.
Novel scheme based on frequency and incremental cost (f/IC)
of MSs.
Time varying model for dc MGs, normalization and projection
algorithm for CRM.
Faster transient response, requires complex parameter
estimations.
Improves stability and eliminates circulating currents.
Provides more damping, mitigates harmonics, good dynamic
response.
Represents perfect power sharing, but restricted to dc MGs
only.
SoCs included, batteries are protected from overcharge and
deep-discharge.
Transmission power loss is reduced, independent of network
topology.
Parameters are tuned heuristically, effects of system
disturbances are reduce, but, GPS increases complexity.
Suitable for hybrid ac/dc MGs, vehicle to grid (V2G) mode is
possible.
Manages proper power sharing, applicable for dc MGs only.
Optimizes total operating cost, ED without any
communication.
Achieves simultaneous current sharing, voltage stability and
adaptive gain scheduling.

123
(Golsorkhi et al., 2017) V-I and adaptive Q-f droop GPS based technique for synchronization of DERs. Enhances controller reliability, real-scale feasibility is difficult.
(Peyghami et al., 2017) Adaptive control Droop control for LV dc MGs based on superimposed ac power Improved load sharing, voltage profile but, deteriorated its
frequency. power quality.
(Sun et al., 2018) f-P/Q droop control A novel droop control for synchronization and power balance Applicable to both RL and RC type loads, However, its usage on
of DERs in cascaded-type MGs. Parallel or interconnected MGs is not explored.
Distributed control (Shafiee et al., 2012) PI control First distributed control scheme for secondary level droop Better stability performance, higher resiliency, reduce steady
control. state deviations in V-f.
(Simpson-Porco et al., 2013; Simpson-Porco Distributed average PI (DAPI) Robust droop scheme against load variations, maintains Makes intuitive tradeoffs between two conflicting goals i.e.
et al., 2015) control frequency using Laplacian averaging method. voltage regulation and Q sharing.
(Nasirian et al., 2014) Adaptive droop and PI control Virtual impedances of DERs are controlled by current Sparse cyber network is used for data exchanges, meant for dc
regulators, voltage regulator compensates drop. MG, need voltage observer.
(Maknouninejad et al., 2014) Optimal control A nonlinear optimal controller for voltage regulation, power Although robust, however, only near-optimal control solution
sharing along with droop control. is obtained.
(Chang & Zhang, 2015) Linear matrix inequalities (LMIs) Primary droop and secondary control for power sharing, also Robustness against small system level disturbances, applied to
synchronize the frequency. meshed lossy MGs with uneven R/X lines.
(Weaver et al., 2015) PI control with HSS based tuning A distributed droop control for interconnected multiple dc Reduction in number of storage units, eliminate steady state.
MGs.
(Lai et al., 2016) Pinned average consensus based A multi-objective cooperative control strategy for ac MGs Reliable for time-varying non-uniform delays, improved
control based on droop technique. stability.
(Avila & Chu, 2016) Pinning multi-agent system (MAS) New droop control scheme for P-f and Q V for primary Simultaneously achieves P-Q sharing, needs low BW
level. communication links.
(Gkavanoudis et al., 2016) Adaptive droop control Balances the charging and discharging cycles of distributed Adjusts droop coefficients proportional to the SoCs of batteries,
BESSs. more DOF.
(Tegling et al., 2016) DAPI and H2 norm based optimal A DAPI based droop is used to study transient performance of Losses are reduced by optimal tuning, optimized transient
control a multi-inverter MG. dynamics.
Hierarchical control (Srinivasan & Kwasinski, 2015) Passivity and integral based A two stage droop controller for current sharing among dc-dc Attains asymptotic stability for local equilibrium points, virtual
controller converters in dc MGs. resistors gives the static droop.
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
S. Sen, V. Kumar
Fig. 3. MGCC structural layers (Tabrizi et al., 2012).
4.2.2. Decentralized control technique
In Ahn and Peng (2013), a decentralized scheme for voltage control
of small LV military MGs is proposed. The model-free control archi-
tecture is divided into two levels: 1) lower level controller, consists of a
phase locked loop (PLL) and an inverter controller, to regulate terminal
voltage and output power. (2) the higher level controller, equipped
with cost function to minimize the distribution power loss. It also helps
to realize the plug-and-play capacity. Advantage of using simple in-
verter model makes it highly efficient, but, as voltage levels for the load
buses were not monitored, its applicability on large MGs is limited.
Fig. 4 shows the proposed two level control structure. In Luo, Lai, Loo,
Tse, and Ruan (2013), a triple-layer droop control scheme for parallel
inverters is presented. The 1st PID droop controller works as conven-
tional P-f and Q-V scheme while, 2nd one sets references for 1st by
monitoring dc link voltage, and 3rd is similar to 1st one, but acts on dc-
dc converter interfaced MSs. It works in both modes and achieves is-
landing without any communication. But, this multi-level approach
causes a delayed control action.
A Linear Matrix Inequality (LMI) technique based robust droop
scheme for stable operation of MG is proposed in Trung (2013). This
controller provides a simple optimal power sharing techniques along
with guaranteed zero steady-state frequency deviation and robust vol-
tage stability under the influence of dynamic load variations. The ro-
bust capability to regulate the MGs’ V-f under bounded variations, gives
this scheme an edge over earlier controller designs. A decentralized
multi-agent (DMAS) technique is used for frequency control of isolated
MG in Liu et al. (2014). It accomplishes cooperative frequency control
using two levels: primary layer by agents of BESS and secondary layer
with MS agents. Communication constraints were also imposed, where
each agent can communicate only with its neighboring agents. Usage of
an optimized Average Consensus Algorithm (ACA) is done to provide
information of global power deficiency to the DMAS. This algorithm
makes the parameter estimation process a cooperative arrangement
Fig. 4. Two level decentralized controller (Ahn & Peng, 2013).
124
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
with the controller, hence, is found to be more accurate.
Thereafter, Etemadi, Davison, and Iravani (2014) presents a de-
centralized robust servomechanism based controller for an autonomous
MG. Here, the frequency is controlled by internal oscillators using GPS,
while a centralized power management system (PMS) decides the vol-
tage and power set point of DERs. Robustness is attained by eigenvalue
and real stability radius studies. HIL test results suggest fast tracking of
set points zero steady state error, robustness under loads variations.
Similarly, a robust Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) based controller
for V-f regulation is presented in Hossain, Lu, Mahmud, and Aziz
(2014). Multi-inverter nonlinear MG model with network uncertainties
is used as test system. The controller is tested for intentional islanding
and severe three-phase faults, which satisfactorily provides the required
level of stability and robust transfer from grid-tied to islanded mode.
Limitation of this controller is that its stability region is confined to a
small post-fault operating point.
In Huang, Liu, Xiao, and Moursi (2015), a novel two-level voltage
control for dc MGs is proposed. The primary layer is based on the droop
scheme to manage load sharing. The secondary layer employs an
average voltage sharing (AVS) using a bi-proper anti-wind-up method
and PI control for parallel operation of VSCs. Then, a pilot bus reg-
ulation is integrated to achieve precise voltage regulation by adjusting
converter reference points. It enhances system reliability and avoids
saturation of controller efforts. In Sadabadi, Karimi, and Karimi (2015),
voltage control of MGs with a radial topology is proposed. A novel LMI
based problem formulation of fixed order control of RESs subject to
polytopic uncertainties done. The controller structure, its parameters
were simultaneously designed using convex optimization technique. A
linear time-invariant (LTI) state space model is derived to validate the
voltage tracking and robust behaviour under load variations of the
proposed controller. Similarly, Riverso, Sarzo, and Ferrari-Trecate
(2015), emphasizes on realizing plug-and-play (PnP) capability of MSs
by an LMI based problem. Usage of quasi-stationary line (QSL) ap-
proximations of distribution network helps in achieving smooth inter-
actions among various MSs is also discussed. This design feature gives a
benefit to include neutral interactions for meshed MG networks without
using a global MG model. On a similar note, Tucci, Riverso, Vasquez,
Guerrero, and Ferrari-Trecate (2016) performs testing and validation of
a voltage controller.
A voltage regulation method for islanded MG is presented in
Toub, Aniba, Maaroufi, and Robinet (2015). The decentralized power
flow control is realized by Hamiltonian Surface Shaping (HSS) and
classical PI method. The controller has both PnP as well as scalability
features and the control strategy shifts the poles to further left of the
imaginary axis hence, increases the stability. In
Lizhen, Xiaohong, Zhengzhe, Zuohao, and Hu (2016), the local DERs
controllers are divided into primary and secondary levels for compen-
sation of voltage unbalances. The secondary layer collect data from all
DERs and generate control law for primary level control by an aver-
aging technique. A similar three-level quasi-hierarchical structure is
given in Zhang, Xin, Wang, and Gan (2016). Here, a droop control for
both voltage- and current-controlled VSCs that interfaces various MSs
within the MG by implementing a simple local PI based structure.
In Sadabadi, Shafiee, and Karimi (2017), the PnP ability of MSs is
represented as a LTI system with polytopic uncertainty. QSL based
model and a robust control strategy based on the convex optimization
method is proposed. Results suggesting guaranteed overall stability,
desired voltage tracking along with robustness to topological changes
without any requirement of retuning of controller parameters. How-
ever, it uses GPS based synchronization hence, failure rate can be high
when signal is interrupted. In Gu, Lou, Tan, and Yuan (2017), a sec-
ondary voltage controller is given using nonlinear state estimation
method. A large-signal dynamic model of MG is derived and using a
linear parameter varying (LPV), the state dynamics of each DERs are
estimated. Then, the controller is designed by LMI and pole placement
conditions. Fig. 5 shows block diagram of the proposed method. This
S. Sen, V. Kumar
Fig. 5. Decentralized secondary voltage control scheme (Gu et al., 2017).
schemes not only achieve average voltage restoration but also facil-
itates accurate reactive power sharing.
In Cook, Parker, Robinett, and Weaver (2017), the HSS based power
flow control for dc MGs is proposed. Three control methods viz. optimal
exergy destruction (OXD), droop control and the decentralized mode-
adaptive (DMA) were designed for voltage regulation. OXD method
helps to reduce the energy loosed in VSCs and DMA minimizes usage of
storage units. All these control strategies use HSS. These OXD and DMA
approaches provide a new control technique whose efficacy lies
somewhere in between droop and centralized strategy.
4.2.3. Distributed control technique
The very first work combining advantages of both central and de-
central control schemes is given in Wu, Tang, Dragicevic, Vasquez, and
Guerrero (2013). A two layer coordinated control strategy for frequency
control is proposed. Primary level has a master-slave architecture
where BESS acts as master, maintains V-f based on the frequency bus
signaling (FBS) and depending upon its SoC, the RESs acts as slave units
working on virtual inertial to generate maximum power. Secondary
layer constitutes a PI controller to mitigate the frequency deviations
arising from lower controller. It has a simple implementation and only
needs low cost communication channels. However, its accuracy and
speed of control action are not satisfactory as monitoring SoC of BESS is
involved.
In Bidram, Davoudi, Lewis, and Guerrero (2013), a secondary level
voltage control is proposed based on cooperative MAS. Dynamics of
inverters are modeled as nonlinear and unequal, then by using input-
output feedback linearization, this is transformed into a framework of
second order linear tracking problem to achieve synchronized opera-
tion of multiple DERs. It also provides desired speed of response by
tuning of control parameters. In Bidram et al. (2013), same authors
attempt this work for frequency control. Later, in
Bidram, Davoudi, Lewis, and Ge (2014), it is extended to incorporate a
linear neural network architecture to compensate uncertainties due to
unknown parameters of the DERs. Results suggest that overall sto-
chastic nature are well addressed, however, design complexity is in-
creased immensely. Similarly, Serban (2014), includes BESS for fre-
quency control. It considers the dead-zone nonlinearity and uses PD and
PID controllers, when Δf is within and beyond range respectively. The
primary uses a PD control action, as derivative term improves MGs’
frequency dynamics by providing a virtual inertia. Simple to implement
and faster transient response are the two benefits of this controller.
A distributed voltage control scheme based on a consensus algo-
rithm for an inductive MG is given in Schiffer, Seel, Raisch, and Sezi
(2014). It simultaneously accomplishes the task of steady-state reactive
power sharing using communication by graph theory. Results suggest it
is successfully able to provide exponential stability at the local level.
125
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Later, in Schiffer, Seel, Raisch, and Sezi (2016), same authors extended
this work and proves the dependency of equilibrium points for closed
loop dynamics of V-Q on selection of control parameters. Although this
technique gives a performance gain against usual voltage droop
schemes and has applicability on arbitrary network topology, the as-
sumption of small phase angle at DERs output is not appropriate for
isolated MGs.
A distributed secondary control (DSC) for regulating power, V-f is
proposed in Shafiee et al. (2014). A wire-less periodic broadcast com-
munication using token or discrete data packets which is simulta-
neously coupled to robust control functionality is presented. The LCs
update the control law by acting on each data exchanges to achieve the
desired response hence, avoids data loss and time delay. Same authors
give a cooperative algorithm for MGs’ frequency synchronization in
Shafiee, Vasquez, Guerrero, Nasirian, and Davoudi (2015). It does not
need to measure the frequency, rather the average active power is es-
timated using consensus method and later, is used as a correction term
to primary droop scheme to achieve the active power sharing and keep
the frequency around the nominal value. However, the control action is
slow.
In Guo, Wen, Mao, and Song (2015), a secondary V-f control scheme
for finite-time voltage regulator to track reference values is given, along
with consensus-based frequency control scheme (which is decoupled
from voltage controller), subject to control input constraints for pro-
portional power sharing. This design gives an edge over the prior ones
in terms of speed of enforcing the control law without much loss of
stability. Related works are also presented in Chen and Feng (2015),
where each control modules: voltage, frequency and power sharing are
realized as primary i.e. LCs. Here, although control action is much
faster, its stability margins are lower. Later, a three level structure for
frequency control and ED is proposed in Xin, Zhang, Wang, Gan, and
Wong (2015). It uses an equal incremental cost function to restore the
frequency in allowable range. LPFs are designed to decouple the dy-
namics and enhance stability. The Control law is given by (8):
fi, des = fpri (Pi ) + fsec ( , fi, des ) + fter ( , Pi, i (Pi ))
with fpri (Pi ) = fmax di Pi
(50 fi, meas )
fsec =
(1 + T2 s )
(fmax di Si i (Pi ) fpri )
fter =
(1 + T3 s ) (8)
For more details refer Xin et al. (2015). In Cady, Domínguez-García,
and Hadjicostis (2015), a distributed control to regulate frequency and
optimal dispatch of MGs with both synchronous and inverter interfaced
MSs is discussed. Here, linear iterative algorithms are integrated into
LCs to provide set points for DERs using local measurements only. The
controller is event triggered i.e. reference points are updated at any
time instant (aperiodic) so that, during constant power requirements,
control effort is zero. Later, same authors in Cady et al. (2015), pro-
poses a synchronization method for MSs. It consists of LCs with two
algorithms: firstly, for a given load demand, determination of set points
that makes the MG stable and in synchronism to the upstream grid.
Thereafter, converging the weighted steady state frequency error to
zero by disturbance rejection using a ratio consensus algorithm and PI
controllers. Both these algorithms help to attain a smooth MG operation
even under persistent small deviations in V-f.
A MAS based control structure for multi-inverter MGs is proposed in
Rahman, Mahmud, Oo, and Orchi (2015). It provides a stable load V-I
during normal operation, under faulty conditions by asymptotic
tracking of the preset reference current signal. PI controllers are de-
signed as agents and tuning is done by using Ziegler–Nichols method.
Comparison of proposed scheme is done with existing conventional
controllers without MAS, results suggest it has a better performance and
ease of parameter adjustments.
S. Sen, V. Kumar Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151

the selected number of MSs, and all MSs exchange information with
neighbouring ones. This helps to achieve P sharing and V-f restoration
at a speed having exponential convergence. This controller can update
its states by impulse jumps and in discrete time with time-varying de-
lays. Same authors in Lu, Yu, Lai, Guerrero, and Zhou (2017), propose a
DSC for V-f control during islanded operation. Here, an uncertain and
sparse communication link is used for data sharing. V-f restoration and
P-Q sharing are accomplished using two discrete-time DSC controllers
working on iterative learning methods. Stability and robustness con-
ditions were also derived using LMI, algebraic graph theory and the
Lyapunov stability theory. Similarly, in Lu et al. (2017), this work is
further extended to a multi-purpose secondary level, with two con-
trollers. First one provides finite time frequency regulation along with P
sharing. Later one is meant for voltage regulation and Q sharing at a
slower time scale. Hence, the functioning of these gets decoupled to
some extent. It also reduces transient overshoot, as enabled by bounded
inputs.
Distributed cooperative strategy for V-f regulation of lossy-line is-
Fig. 6. Design procedure of proposed control scheme (Wang et al., 2015). landed MGs is proposed in Wu, Shen, and Iravani (2017). It comple-
ments the primary droop control and achieves zero frequency error at
steady state along with optimal active power sharing. Also, maintains
In Wang et al. (2015), distributed voltage-predictive control
critical voltage level at selected nodes simultaneous to reactive power
strategy for ac MGs is proposed. It uses the estimated network voltages
sharing. The proposed scheme uses a unified dynamic small-signal MG
based on Kalman filter state estimator. The advantage of the presented
model that allows to provide control objective even when ac-side vol-
controller is being capable of providing offset-free voltage signal at a
tage limits have reached for a DER. In Lou, Gu, Xu, Cheng, and Liu
specific node. The block diagram shown in Fig. 6 gives the design
(2017) also, a secondary level V-f controller is proposed. Here, voltage
process. Several test conditions i.e. various uncertainties in parameters
control is achieved by MPC consensus tracking problem and rolling
and load, disturbances in LC filter and output impedance as well as
optimization. A PI control in addition to a global frequency estimator
faults were simulated and the result shows its robustness against all
provides frequency regulation and proportional power sharing. Here,
these issues. Later, in Wang, Wang, Chen, and Blaabjerg (2017), this
control laws are robust against intervals of information updates. Simi-
work is extended by estimating the Q distribution along with system
larly, a V-f control based on finite-time strategy is proposed in
voltages by local measurements. Thereafter, optimal controller is de-
Dehkordi, Sadati, and Hamzeh (2017). Here, advantages are that it
signed to optimize the whole MG. Although there is an improvement in
doesn't require detailed accurate model as input-output feedback line-
steady-state voltage profile, it has slower dynamic characteristics.
arization converts nonlinear, uncertain dynamics of MSs into linear. It
In Liu et al. (2016), pinning control technique is used for V-f control
is independent of parametric uncertainties of line and loads, MG con-
of MGs. It provides the advantage of using small number of feedback
figuration or feeder topology.
controller, hence by pinning certain agents of MAS, complete syn-
A droop-free frequency control scheme based on the quasi-Newton
chronization of DERs can be achieved. It is robust against commu-
technique is given in Wang, Wu, and Zhang (2017). It is a second order
nication topologies i.e. fixed and uncertain and facilitates PnP of DERs.
method hence, able to attain a super-linear convergence rate, making
Similar pinning oriented primary and secondary voltage control
faster frequency control than existing first order methods. It also
strategy with bounded uncertain time delays is proposed in Lai et al.
minimizes the generation cost by using equal increment rate criteria for
(2016). Using a DER as virtual leader, the desired frequency of rest of
power sharing among RESs. Peer-to-peer sparse communication is
DERs is pinned and based on a developed average consensus algorithm,
successfully able to tackle measurement errors, time delays and over-
Q is shared proportionally. It also improves stability, robust due to
shooting. Block diagram representation of operation of an agent is
bounded time varying communication delays. This gives an easy im-
shown in Fig. 7. In El-Taweel and Farag (2017), a novel distributed
plementation procedure with desired responses.
constraint satisfaction (DCS) based voltage control strategy is for-
Kammer and Karimi (2016) presents a primary droop and secondary
mulated. Similar peer-to-peer link and MAS is used medium to solve the
level frequency control. Here, a less complex model of multi-inverters
problem with an asynchronous weak commitment (AWC) methodology.
MG is built by dynamic phasor method, capturing the electro-
It takes into account the variations in generation and loads. This
mechanical and electromagnetic dynamics. Later, using H2 control
method is less affected by message delays and is easily scalable.
technique a secondary level scheme is formulated and solved by convex
optimization in frequency-domain. Computational burden for this
controller is relatively less, without compromising much on robust its
performance.
A peer-to-peer MAS voltage control scheme using gossip-based
communication and push-sum algorithm is proposed in
Engels, Almasalma, and Deconinck (2016). It mitigates voltage differ-
ence by updating the required P-Q at asynchronous time steps. The step
size is computed using gradient descent and backtracking line search
technique. This control strategy avoids issues of synchronization among
different devices. A secondary voltage controller that decides control
input for Q-V droop is given in Wang, Sun, and Nikovski (2016). It
provides improved power quality in MG network and maintains con-
stant voltage at PCC even during load and state variations. Similarly, a
droop based controller using two distributed impulsive algorithms is
proposed in Lu, Liu, and Zhu (2016). This gives access to set values for Fig. 7. Operational block diagram of agent (Wang et al., 2017).

126
S. Sen, V. Kumar
However, there are other improved methods for small scale MGs and its
usage is restricted to large sized MGs only.
A novel finite-time restoration of V-f by cooperative control based
on consensus paradigm is given in Pilloni, Pisano, and Usai (2018). It
uses a chattering-free SMC, which enhances the system robustness and
convergence properties with respect to existing designs. It achieves
these objectives while dispensing the parameter and DERs models in-
formation i.e. it has a faster transient response. On a similar note, an-
other finite-time MAS based control with BESSs is proposed in Zhang
and Hredzak (2018). It converts the SoC balancing and voltage re-
storation problems respectively to double- and single-integrator sys-
tems with some latency. Thereafter, Artstein transformation is used
convert these to delay-free systems. It requires only sparse commu-
nication and is resilient to link failure with PnP features. An optimal
distributed V-f restoration at the secondary level is discussed in
Xu, Sun, Gu, Xu, and Li (2018). Achieves finite-time convergence for
frequency and P sharing. The average voltage magnitude of all DERs are
able to be regulated at an asymptotic convergence rate. Its benefits
being cost effective and support scalability. Similarly, a secondary level
V-f controller based on consensus algorithm is proposed in Duan et al.
(2018). It computes the reference phase angles for bus voltages using
fair load sharing and dc power flow. At primary level, feedback line-
arization with dynamic bounds on control law is designed for voltage
regulation and suppression of transient line current. It greatly enhances
system reliability under the conditions of approaching limiting capacity
and at some system level faults.
4.2.4. Hierarchical control technique
A hierarchical structure to compensate voltage unbalances of load
buses of droop controlled MGs was first proposed in
(Savaghebi, Guerrero, Jalilian, & Vasquez, 2011). The LCs of each MSs
consists primary droop control. While in secondary level, proportional-
resonant (PR) control technique is used to restore voltage amplitude at
load bus and frequency of whole MG to nominal value. Though this
controller design method is simple yet, the required level of perfor-
mance is not achieved. Three level scheme that combines low-level
distributed, high-layer supervision control together for economic op-
eration of isolated dc MGs is proposed in (Jin, Wang, Xiao, Tang, &
Choo, 2014). It is accomplished by maintaining proper dc-bus voltage.
Hierarchical Level I (HLI) is meant for keeping bus voltage within
nominal value through changing various modes of VSCs. The HLII
regulates voltage of PV modules and sets the priority of battery char-
ging/discharging with different SoCs. HLIII is for emergency situations
like sudden load or generation change due to failure. Although it suc-
cessfully achieves overall voltage regulation, small difference still exists
at bus level. A voltage control and power sharing of a cluster of dc MGs
using a three-layer hierarchy is given in (Shafiee et al., 2014). Primary
control layer locally controls the common bus voltage. While secondary
works as: centralized to maintain nominal voltage by restoring voltage
deviations of every MG arising due to primary layer and decentralized
to maintain a power flow under inter-connected operation. The last
layer is called power flow control (PFC) to regulate MGs’ current ex-
change at tie-line. Similarly, in (Lee, Zhu, Zheng, Choi, & Wei, 2014), a
controller consists of hierarchical bus, an ac-dc converter at PCC, a
voltage level converter and PV and BESS interfacing converter. By
controlling these converters, a stable and reliable operation of all these
MGs under different modes are achieved. But, is restricted to dc type
MGs only.
A new method for V-f control is presented in Ramezani and Li
(2016). Primary droop layer is designed using direct current vector
control (DCVC) method. Later, it integrates secondary control layer
with DCVC-based droop controller to achieve an improved V-f stability
and power quality. The modified droop action is given by (9). It helps to
prevent operation of VSIs beyond limits viz. PWM saturation limits and
rated current.
127
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Vi = Vi* kVi (Pi Pi*)
fi = f i* k fi (Qi Qi*) (9)
A two-layer structure for V-f control is proposed in
Bella, Cominesi, Sandroni, and Scattolini (2017). The primary layer
comprises of decentralized droop control at local DERs level to limit the
network variables within nominal range. While secondary layer uses a
centralized MPC, power profiles and some predictions to formulate
constrained optimization cost function. It attains rated steady state
values of variables within a finite-time. However, accuracy of this
control method lies in correctness of prediction technique. In Zamora
and Srivastava (2018), a multi-layer structure for networked MGs is
given. Inner layers are meant to regulate V-f using LCs. The MGCC holds
the authority to manage the EMS for power sharing with utility and
neighboring MGs. It has advantage that, if the communication link fails,
droop control characteristic by lower controllers gets activated. Pro-
posed controller is suitable for distribution lines with high R/X ratio,
however, involvement of SoCs of the BESS slows down its control ac-
tion. Recently, to tackle the issues of high cost and degradation ten-
dencies of batteries storage units, a stochastic fractional-order PID
based load frequency control is proposed in
Khooban, Niknam, Shasadeghi, Dragicevic, and Blaabjerg (2018). It
suggests to realize the vehicle to grid (V2G) concepts using the electric
vehicles (EVs) within the microgrid. The parameters of the non-integer
PID controller are tuned by the modified black hole optimization
method. Even though complexity involved in the proposed scheme is
quite high, it tracks the frequency with reduced fluctuation, deviation
and is observed to be more robust than existing load frequency con-
trollers. Voltage and frequency control is summarized in Table 3.
4.3. Active and reactive power sharing
4.3.1. Centralized control
In conventional power system, task of matching generation with
load demand is performed by economic dispatch (ED) and unit com-
mitment (UC). In case of MGs, generation-demand is balanced by
proper active and reactive power (P-Q) sharing algorithms. In this re-
gard, an interfacing converter between MG and upstream network is
proposed in Deng, Zhang, Wang, Gu, and Wu (2013), Yue, Zhao, Lu,
and Li (2010). The flexible PE structure is formed by a back-to-back
connection of full-controlled IGBT based ac-dc converters. A dc storage
controller based on PI control is placed at the middle of the converter
(Yue et al., 2010), while PID control in Deng et al. (2013). It helps in
maintaining accurate power flow from the grid to MG or vice versa as
per the requirement and helps to mitigate transmission of harmonic
components from one side to other. The advantage of these control
strategies for P-Q sharing is that these simultaneously accomplishes the
task of power exchange with upstream grid i.e. acts as partial energy
management system (EMS). Also, are easy to implement.
A master/slave method based two-stage centralized control strategy
for power sharing and voltage regulation of LV MG is proposed in
Cavraro, Caldognetto, Carli, and Tenti (2016). Here, the master con-
troller located at PCC receives power data from active nodes and then
transmits P reference points to DERs. The data are non-critical time
hence, were broadcasted over low-BW link. Slave or LC regulates the
output voltage magnitude of DERs. Although this method achieves ac-
curate P-Q sharing at PCC and also avoids overvoltage at nodes, it uses a
model-free method which might lead to implementation difficulties in
actual scenarios.
4.3.2. Decentralized control
The issue of active power sharing of the VSCs in a MG is considered
in Divshali, Alimardani, Hosseinian, and Abedi (2012). Decentralized
controllers based on hybrid model is presented. It constitutes modular
PI controllers for power, voltage, current and output filter control of
each DERs and works upon local measurements of frequency and
 Table 3
Summary of voltage and frequency control techniques for microgrids.
Design technique Authors Control principle Contribution Comments (Benefits/limitations)
S. Sen, V. Kumar

Centralized control (Akbari et al., 2011) PI control A centralized voltage control method for MGs with both ac, Simple to implement, restore voltage stability under generation
dc sources under grid-tied mode. uncertainty.
(Tabrizi et al., 2012) Lead-lag controller MG voltage controller (MGVC) to handle various Improved voltage profile for both pre-and post-islanding, supports
contingencies. existing Q controllers.
(Karimi et al., 2017) Adaptive control Controlled under frequency load shedding incorporating a Modular structure facilitates easy modifications, but, use of
state estimator. estimator gives slow response.
Decentralized control (Ahn & Peng, 2013) Model-free controller Voltage control of small LV military MGs with PLL. Minimize distribution power loss, but, load buses voltages were
ignored.
(Luo et al., 2013) PID and droop control A triple-layer droop control scheme for parallel inverters. Regulates the dc-bus link, delayed control action.
(Trung, 2013) Linear Matrix Inequality (LMI) control Robust droop scheme for stable operation of MG and voltage Guaranteed zero steady-state frequency deviation, optimal power
stability. sharing.
(Liu et al., 2014) Decentralized multi-agent system Optimized average consensus Algorithm for frequency Imposed communication constraints, parameter estimation in
(DMAS) control. cooperative with controller.
(Etemadi et al., 2014) Robust servomechanism control Frequency controller by internal oscillators using GPS and a Fast tracking of set points, zero steady state error and robust
PMS for voltage and power set point. against loads variations.
(Hossain et al., 2014) Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) control Controller for nonlinear MG model with uncertainties and Although robust and supports islanding, but, stability region is
under islanding, fault scenarios. confined to a small post-fault operating point.
(Huang et al., 2015) PI control Two-level voltage control and parallel operation of VSCs for Enhances system reliability and avoids saturation of controller
dc MGs. efforts.
(Sadabadi et al., 2015) LMI control Voltage control of inverter-interfaced islanded MGs with Robust behaviour under load variations, accurate voltage tracking.
radial topology.
(Riverso et al., 2015) LMI control Realizing PnP capability of MSs using quasi-stationary line Includes neutral interactions for meshed MG networks without
(QSL) approximations using a global MG model.
(Toub et al., 2015) PI control with HSS tuning Voltage regulation and power flow control method for PnP as well as scalability features, improved stability.
islanded MG.

128
(Lizhen et al., 2016) Proportional resonant (PR) and PI control Local DERs controllers with two level compensation of Reduced communication needs, easy expansion, but, slower
voltage unbalances. dynamics.
(Zhang et al., 2016) Quasi-hierarchical droop and PI control Three level decentralized structure for droop controlled Simple to design, uses a nonlinear droop curve for local ED, f
islanded MGs. restoration.
(Sadabadi et al., 2017) Robust controller with convex A linear time-invariant (LTI) system with polytopic Higher failure rate as GPS is used for synchronization.
optimization uncertainty.
(Gu et al., 2017) LMI control Secondary voltage control strategy is using nonlinear state Achieves robust average voltage and facilitates accurate power
estimator. sharing.
(Cook et al., 2017) Optimal and adaptive control Voltage regulation using optimal exergy destruction (OXD) Better accuracy then droop scheme, however, design complexity is
and mode-adaptive control. quite high.
Distributed control (Wu et al., 2013) PI controller with frequency bus signaling A two layer coordinated strategy for frequency control of Simple, needs low cost, low-BW communication channels, but, has
MG. sluggish control action.
(Bidram et al., 2013; 2014) MAS with feedback linearization and Second order linear tracking problem to achieve Provides desired speed of response by parameter tuning, complex
neural network synchronized operation of multiple DERSs. design.
(Serban, 2014) PD and PID control A secondary level frequency control strategy including BESS. Simple to implement, faster transients, includes dead-zone
nonlinearity.
(Schiffer et al., 2014; Schiffer et al., Consensus algorithm Voltage control scheme based on a consensus algorithm for Applicable to arbitrary network topologies, but, assumes a small
2016) an inductive line MG. phase angle at DERs.
(Shafiee et al., 2014; Shafiee et al., Cooperative control A distributed secondary control (DSC) for regulating power, Uses wire-less discrete data packets hence, avoids data loss and
2015) voltage and frequency of a MG. time delay but, slow action.
(Chen & Feng, 2015; Guo et al., 2015) Consensus algorithm A finite-time voltage regulator and consensus-based Decoupled controllers therefore are independent, faster response
frequency control scheme. without much loss of stability
(Xin et al., 2015) Distributed incremental cost algorithm A three level structure for frequency control and ED. LPFs are designed to decouple the dynamics and enhance stability.
(Cady et al., 2015) Linear iterative algorithms and PI Frequency regulation and optimal dispatch of synchronous Event triggered, requires less control effort, zero steady state
controllers and inverter interfaced MSs. frequency error.
(Rahman et al., 2015) MAS and PI control Controller for stable load V-I during both normal operation Ease of parameter adjustments, asymptotic tracking of preset
and under faulty conditions. reference current signal.
Distributed control (Wang et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2017) Distributed voltage-predictive control Voltage regulation and reactive power sharing using state Gives offset-free voltage signal, improved steady-state but, slower
estimators. dynamic characteristics.
(continued on next page)
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
 Table 3 (continued)

Design technique Authors Control principle Contribution Comments (Benefits/limitations)

(Liu et al., 2016) Pinning control and MAS Distributed architecture for V-f control of islanded MGs. Small number of feedback controller, PnP capabilities.
S. Sen, V. Kumar

(Lai et al., 2016) Pinning control and average consensus
algorithm
(Kammer & Karimi, 2016) H2 optimal control and convex
optimization
(Engels et al., 2016) MAS and push-sum algorithm
(Wang et al., 2016) Distributed droop based controller
(Lu et al., 2016; Lu, Wang, Ai, & Lee, Distributed impulsive algorithm and LMI
2017)
(Wu et al., 2017) Cooperative control
(Lou et al., 2017) MPC with consensus tracking and rolling
optimization
(Dehkordi et al., 2017) Input-output feedback linearization
(Wang et al., 2017) Quasi-Newton technique
(El-Taweel & Farag, 2017) Distributed constraint satisfaction (DCS)
and MAS
(Pilloni et al., 2018) Cooperative control and SMC
(Zhang & Hredzak, 2018) MAS based control
(Xu et al., 2018) Optimal control
Voltage control strategy for islanded MGs with bounded
uncertain time delays.
A primary droop and secondary level frequency control
scheme.
Peer-to-peer voltage control scheme using gossip-based
communication.
A secondary voltage controller that decides control input for
Q-V droop primary control.
A secondary droop based controller for V-f restoration.
A strategy for V-f regulation of lossy-line islanded MGs.
Secondary level V-f controller with reactive power sharing.
A V-f control based on finite-time strategy.
A second order droop-free frequency control scheme.
A voltage control strategy with asynchronous weak
commitment (AWC) methodology.
Novel finite-time restoration of V-f of an islanded MG.
Finite-time control strategy for dc MGs with BESSs.
Distributed V-f restoration at secondary Level.
Robustness to bounded time varying communication delays,
proportional Q sharing.
Simpler dynamic phasor model is used, robust performance.
Asynchronous time steps and doesn't need to synchronize with all
devices.
Improved power quality, keeps constant voltage at PCC even
during load and state variations.
Updates its states by impulse jumps in discrete time, reduce
overshoots.
Zero frequency error at steady state, uses a unified dynamic small-
signal model.
Control laws are robust against intervals of information updates,
need global frequency estimator.
Independent of parametric uncertainties, doesn't required a
detailed MG model.
Attains super-linear convergence rate, minimizes generation cost,
immune to measurement errors.
Less affected by message delays, easily scalable, implementation is
restricted to large MGs only.
Enhances system robustness, speed and convergence properties.
Artstein transformation converts it to a delay-free system, resilient
and PnP.
Asymptotic convergence rate, scalable and low-BW
communication.

129
(Duan et al., 2018)
Hierarchical control (Savaghebi et al., 2011)
(Jin et al., 2014)
(Shafiee et al., 2014)
(Ramezani & Li, 2016)
(Bella et al., 2017)
(Zamora & Srivastava, 2018)
(Khooban et al., 2018)
Consensus algorithm and feedback
linearization
Proportional-resonant (PR) control
PI controller
Consensus and PI control
PI and droop control
MPC
Adaptive modified droop and PI
controller
Fractional order PID controller
A secondary level V-f controller based on consensus
algorithm.
A hierarchical compensator for voltage unbalances at load
buses of droop based MGs.
Three level strategy to combine low-level distributed and
high-layer supervision for ED.
A voltage control and power sharing of a cluster of dc MGs.
Direct current vector control (DCVC) method for V-f control
A two-layer structure for V-f control of an islanded MG.
A multi-layer control structure for multi-purpose networked
MGs.
Stochastic load frequency control (LFC) architecture.
Accomplishes voltage regulation and suppression of transient line
current.
Simple to realize, but, doesn't meet the required level of
performance.
Successfully achieves overall voltage regulation, but still small
differences exists at bus level.
Regulate MGs current exchange at tie-line, restores voltage
deviations.
Control scheme is restricted to dc type MGs only
Attains rated steady state values of variables within a finite-time.
Robust to link failures, due to SoCs of BESS slows down the control
action.
Reduced fluctuation in frequency and comparatively more robust
in nature but, higher complexity.
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
S. Sen, V. Kumar
voltage. It considers one BESS unit which is being operated with a co-
operative strategy to manage the dc link voltage of MSs within an ac-
ceptable range. This control scheme is simple to realize, however, ac-
curacy and overall optimized operation of the MG is not achieved. To
fill this gap, Zhao et al. (2015) presents a multi-objective control
scheme for coordination and optimization of dc MG. Here, a primary
voltage droop control is discussed first, which illustrates its load sharing
capabilities. Thereafter, it is augmented with a secondary integral
control to compensate for voltage deviations at steady state. A con-
sensus filter based upon distributed averaging PI (DAPI) is designed for
regulation of optimal injections. Optimal ED algorithm for multiple
DERs also achieves overall optimization. A power flow control on V-I
droop characteristics is given in Golsorkhi and Lu (2014). Here, the
voltage components of D- and q-axis is drooped as a piecewise linear
function with the respective axis currents. Advantages over conven-
tional P-f and Q-V droop were studied. It increases the damping while
decreasing time constant hence, dynamic response of MG system and
stability is significantly improved. Results show less than 3% error in
power and current sharing under high loading conditions.
A hierarchical three-layered decentralized method for active power
control using local frequency measurements, f-P droop scheme is im-
plemented in Xin et al. (2016). The controller has two parts: hier-
archical frequency control (HFC) and frequency tracking control (FTC),
realized by control PI (10). Simulations results suggest its enhanced
efficacy along with self-optimizing capability.
fsec ( , fi, des ) fter ( , Pi,
fi, des = fpri (Pi ) + + a novel nodal pricing computation method, the detailed para-
(1 + T2 s ) (1 + T3 s )
with f pri (Pi ) = fmax di Pi
fsec ( , fi, des ) = (fnom fi, des )
fter ( , Pi ,
i (Pi )) = fmax di Si i (Pi ) fpri
In Yang et al. (2016), the model free current sharing scheme for dc
MGs with multi-buses is proposed. It is having two parts: first one is a
droop controller which uses the virtual capacitor to realize a modified
global indicator and rate of change of output voltage to eliminate the
effects of network mismatches. While the second one is complementary
voltage stabilizer with shunt virtual resistance. These help in achieving
zero steady-state voltage error. In He, Li, Liang, and Wang (2017), a P-Q
sharing for series-connected micro converters to integrate the DERs is
proposed. The conventional droop control is not applicable for series-
connected microconverters hence a novel inverse power factor-fre-
quency (PF-f) based droop controller is introduced as given in (11). This
scheme found to be non-sensitive to variation in feeder impedances and
filter parameters. Comparison results between the proposed and con-
ventional droop method show its improved performance and stability.
cut
= * + mPF . PFLPF and PFLPF = s + cut
cos( )
with * = Ecos ( * = kinner . (I *
dt ), V PWM
A coordinated control of inverters operating in voltage and current
controlled modes (VCM/CCM) is discussed
(Mousavi, Jalilian, Savaghebi, & Guerrero, 2018), for Q sharing and
compensation of harmonic from voltage waveforms. The capacitive
virtual impedance of VCM units compensates harmonics by nullifying
output inductance of LCL filter. The reactive power is regulated by
considering distorted and remaining power capacities of both VCM and
CCM units to implement modified and reverse droop strategies. Ad-
vantages of this controller are that it gives a simple and low cost so-
lutions of Q-V regulation without the need for any communication
setup. The multi-time scale power controller for hybrid MG with several
interacting subgrids is proposed in Xia, Wei, Yu, Peng, and Tang (2018).
These subgrids operate in coordination and support each other to
minimize power fluctuations. This is achieved in three time scales, first
two are executed at a subgrid level where the ac frequency and dc
voltage is regulated by droop control at loads and DERs respectively
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
and last one at system level considering the generation capacities and
load types. Although this deals with actual implementation issues of
hybrid MGs, several other issues i.e. interconnecting PE converters and
synchronization of DERs are not explored.
4.3.3. Distributed control
Early works on P-Q sharing using the distributed scheme is explored
in Bolognani and Zampieri (2011); Bolognani and Zampieri (2013). The
reactive power is compensated by using PE converters during light load
conditions. An approximate model of MG is used to form a reactive
power flow problem in linear constrained convex optimization frame-
work. Thereafter, convergence conditions and its speed, bounds are
decided by using the random gossip-like algorithm. Results show that it
is successful to minimize power distribution losses. It also has robust
capabilities against small load fluctuations. However, its design im-
plementation is difficult and costly.
The problem of power/current sharing by the DERs and voltage
regulation in a dc MG is given in Anand, Fernandes, and Guerrero
(2013). To accomplish the objective two control schemes are used:
droop to achieve proper power sharing but, it in turns deteriorates the
voltage profile. A second controller based on digital average current
sharing (DACS), requiring a low-BW communication is used to improve
voltage regulation. Although stable and cost effective, this controller is
not able to meet MGs’ operational dynamic requirements. In Asad and
Kazemi (2014), a modular power sharing scheme called optimal dc
power sharing (ODCPS) for radial connected dc MGs is presented. Using
i (Pi ))
meterization of the controller is also discussed. It also takes into ac-
count the power losses across the feeders to obtain an optimized control
methodology. It is highly effective, and reduced computations, ro-
bustness against load variation, expansion of DERs and least utilization
(10)
of communication.
A multi-objective two-layer control strategy is presented in
Bidram, Davoudi, and Lewis (2014), Cai, Hu, Lewis, and Davoudi
(2016). The first layer constitutes control scheme for voltage controlled
VSCs (VCVSCs) which main task is to regulate the frequency and vol-
tage. While the second layer is used for current controlled VSCs
(CCVSCs), here the objective is to achieve a proportional active and
reactive power sharing. This control scheme uses a one-way commu-
nication facility and MAS method therefore, is economical than prior
centralized and decentralized strategies. It is also robust against failure
of a few communication-links. Similarly, Nasirian, Moayedi, Davoudi,
and Lewis (2015), discusses an architecture for voltage control and
power sharing in dc MGs. The conventional secondary layer is replaced
V-I regulators and a noise-resilient observer. It uses a global dynamic
model which communicates over sparse communication graph. This
controller has improved transient response and is quick tunable.
Thereafter, in Nasirian, Shafiee, Guerrero, Lewis, and Davoudi (2016),
same authors gave a droop-free multi-purpose cooperative control
Io) (11)
scheme for ac MGs. Each inverter control (an agent) has three modules:
voltage, reactive and active power regulator modules built-in. The
voltage regulator adjusts local voltage set points using estimated global
average voltage. Later, another reference point correction is provided
by Q regulator. This scheme effectively regulates P, attains proportional
load sharing and synchronizes frequency by adjusting set point.
Secondary level power sharing schemes for dc MGs are also pro-
posed in Peyghami-Akhuleh, Mokhtari, Loh, and Blaabjerg (2016),
Wang et al. (2016). In (Wang et al. (2016), the architecture consists of
three controllers: voltage, current and droop coefficient controllers. It
uses voltage-shifting and slope-updating techniques together so that,
small voltage deviation is mitigated and current sharing accuracy is
enhanced during fast-changing loads. Similar droop based method is
given in Peyghami-Akhuleh et al. (2016). Here, a communication link
of low-BW is used to share current value information of nearby in-
verters and adjust the output current and regulate voltage at concerned
inverter. It consists of two local MS controllers for voltage and current
130
S. Sen, V. Kumar
regulation. In both these methods, the average voltage is regulated by
using currents data. Hence, are simple to realize but, its applicability is
limited to dc MGs only.
A distributed control framework for VSIs in an autonomous ac MG is
proposed in Chang and Zhang (2016). It provides a robust proportional
power sharing along with frequency and voltage regulation for each
inverter on the basis of measured P/Q power among its nearby in-
verters. It is applicable for both mesh and radial topologies with mixed
R/X values. Bilinear matrix inequality (BMI) constraints on voltage
magnitudes are considered to establish convergence conditions by sol-
ving an optimization problem at steady state. Although it has a complex
structure, benefits in terms of partial communication failure, in-
dependent of network topology are substantial. A secondary consensus
based controller for Q sharing and voltage regulation is proposed in
Ahmadi, Nazarpour, Shafiee, and Bevrani (2016). It adds correction
term in the droop coefficients by comparing generation of neighboring
inverters, while voltage regulator maintains the average voltage around
rated value. PI controls are used for the purpose, whose consensus
based tuning and parameters of communication link is set using fuzzy
logic. This method helps to include parameter uncertainties within
various elements of the MG. In Hu, Zhou, Liu, Guan, and Chi (2016),
work from Bolognani and Zampieri (2013) is extended further by in-
cluding generation limits of MSs into reformulated objective function.
Then, by using logarithmic barrier function, optimal control framework
is converted into equality constraint problem. This not only eases
computations for control action, resulting into faster response but also,
enhances its accuracy.
A reactive power sharing technique with unmatched output im-
pedance of DERs is given in Zhang, Kim, Sun, and Zhou (2017). It es-
timates reactive power mismatch and uses a PI distributed consensus
scheme to adaptively adjust virtual impedance of the DERs. By doing so
the circulating line current is also getting suppressed. Another con-
sensus controller restores average voltage of MG by regulating output
voltage of each DER. This gives an extra DOF for developing voltage
controller along with proportionate Q sharing. Similar decoupled ar-
chitecture is discussed in Fan, Hu, and Egerstedt (2017), for islanded
MGs where the voltage controller works with a nonlinear state feed-
back, built using the Lyapunov principle. Here, MGs’ inverter model for
injection of reactive power is built based on bus angle differences. This
reduces the amount of communication network usage by using event-
triggered control scheme. Also, because the droop control is considered
hence, avoids secondary control layer, therefore, is faster and more
accurate. Similarly, Moayedi and Davoudi (2017), presents a controller
to achieve both proportional power sharing and bus voltage regulation
simultaneously. The total generation cost is minimized by solving an ED
problem to accomplish generation optimization. Later, voltage re-
ference of VSCs are adjusted by (1) voltage regulator to match gen-
eration-demand equality (2) optimizer to have same incremental costs.
Then, it is used to enforce inequality constraints. Overall design is
difficult and has stochastic interferences. But, it accomplishes multiple
tasks. The objective function is given as:
N N
L= Ci (Pi ) + PD + PL PND Pi
i=1 i=1 (12)
In (Wang et al. (2017), issues of reactive power and voltage reg-
ulation is tackled by a combination of a Kalman based state estimator
and distributed optimal controller. An input-output relationship for the
whole MG system is built using small-signal model and sensitivity
analysis to evaluate the voltage and power sharing response. Results
suggest that, its dynamic response depends on the coefficients of power
error and voltage weight. In Li et al. (2017), a two-layered network is
presented. The communication network has two sub-graphs: first one
includes all agents, which maintains the generation-demand balance
and later one constitutes of only controllable agents that ensure optimal
dispatch of P-Q. This scheme is evaluated by different cases of
131
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
environmental conditions, fluctuating load demands. In all these cases,
it achieves a near-optimal solution.
A droop controller for sharing the harmonic and imbalance power to
obtain a sinusoidal voltage is proposed in Zhou, Kim, Zhang, Sun, and
Han (2017). Consensus control scheme is also developed to regulate the
virtual impedance of DERs to enhance Q sharing capability. Along with
these, a PI principle based secondary level voltage regulator is also
developed, which compensates for the voltage deviations caused by
above two controllers. This controller has benefit of enhanced flex-
ibility and reliability without need of information on line impedance.
Zholbaryssov and Dominguez-Garcia (2017), gives a P sharing con-
troller based upon slow adjusting set point i.e. tracking a slow-varying
reference so that the trajectory satisfies phase-cohesive property in
lossless MGs. Its advantage is that the system always remain within the
stable zone as line voltage phase angle always lies within |π/2|. It also
regulates frequency within nominal range. Similarly, a multi-functional
secondary control strategy is proposed in Shafiee, Nasirian, Vasquez,
Guerrero, and Davoudi (2017). It consists of three modules: 1) voltage
regulator, which regulates the average MG voltage at nominal value. 2)
reactive power regulator, diminishes Q mismatch by tuning the coef-
ficients of Q-V droop. 3) P-f regulator, maintains nominal frequencies of
all DERs along with P sharing. It doesn't need f measurements as it uses
active power data to control frequency. If any communication link fails,
it is able to adapts and reduces own capability to acts as a conventional
droop controller.
Distributed estimation and secondary controller (DESC) for islanded
MGs is proposed in Zhang et al. (2017). It achieves active power sharing
and frequency normalization by using two subsystems: (1) dynamic
average observer (DAO) estimates the average load demand, which is
compared to total generation of PVs to compute the power unbalances.
Thereafter, using (2) finite time consensus controller, active power is
shared fairly within a small time scale. Its accuracy is more and ac-
complishes frequency regulation but, inclusion of an estimator also
creates stability issues and increased complexity. A fully distributed
strategy is discussed in Meng, Wang, and Liu (2018) for intermittent
RESs using a need-based aperiodic data transfer. It maintains supply-
demand by MAS-based discovery algorithm to acquire the knowledge of
whole MG. The benefit of this scheme is that as the agents transfers its
status to neighbours only when an event occurs, so reduced capacity
communication links are enough. Similarly, in Cai and Hu (2018)
power control within the ac MG with cluster of spatially concentrated
dispatchable DERs is discussed. The problem is formulated as a leader-
follower MAS based tracking at two levels. The lower controller is ro-
bust in achieving set power output tracking by taking account of un-
certainties and upper one decides the proportional power sharing base
for these DERs using global information. It takes into account uncertain
dynamics of DERs using internal model design and supports PnP cap-
ability.
4.3.4. Hierarchical control
In a first, two-level MAS based hierarchical control strategy for
regulation of P-Q under both operating modes is presented in Chamorro
and Díaz (2013). The lower physical layer is for the droop control of
VSCs depending upon load changes and power exchanges. Independent
nonlinear fuzzy controllers and two PD fuzzy controllers are used at this
level. The upper layer sends the set points values for the lower layer
agents based upon dynamic observation and pre-specified rules. Im-
portant features like reconfigurable, fast synchronization, are added.
However, the conversion of the nonlinear fuzzy controller to linear PD
is a tedious task. A two-stage frequency management system of an is-
landed MG is proposed in Rezaei and Kalantar (2014). The first layer
utilizes stochastic random scenarios depending upon Roulette Wheel
Method (RWM) and Lattice Monte Carlo Simulation (LMCS) including
intermittent sources and load fluctuation. Later, second stage has MILP
objective function by taking into account the economic policies, various
stochastic scenarios, contingencies of unit or line outage etc. however,
S. Sen, V. Kumar
its boundedness within predefined ranges is not quite effective.
In Caldognetto, Tenti, Mattavelli, Buso, and Brandao (2015), a
three-layered master/slave control architecture is given. It uses con-
servative power theory (CPT) at primary level to manage local loads by
compensating its reactive and harmonic currents to stabilize the vol-
tage. P-Q sharing is managed at secondary level using MCs acting as
slaves, located with DERs. Interactions between MG and utility is
managed at tertiary level using a master controller. Usage of CPT helps
to bring a certain level of optimization. A two-level load sharing, power
quality improvement scheme is proposed in Golsorkhi, Lu, Savaghebi,
Vasquez, and Guerrero (2016). Here, the primary layer comprises
adaptive V-I droop controllers, where coefficients are adjusted as a
function of peak output current of DERs. A GPS timing based frequency
synchronizer is also used. Secondary layer has a mechanism to elim-
inate voltage harmonics at sensitive buses by generating a compen-
sating signal, hence, power quality is enhanced. Issues of using GPS is
equally applicable here.
A novel ANN based reactive power set point calculation for im-
proved power sharing in conventional hierarchical controlled MGs is
presented in Baghaee, Mirsalim, and Gharehpetian (2016). The Radial
Basis Function (RBF) is applied on classical power flow equations,
which is faster and accurate as well as able to enhance stability margins
under both small and large signal disturbances using an additional
complementary control loop. However, usage of ANN increases overall
complexity and implementation difficulties for the controller. An en-
hanced P-Q sharing for islanded ac MG is proposed in Han et al. (2016).
The primary layer implements three loops viz. virtual positive sequence
impedance (VPI) loop that helps to achieve P-f droop and virtual ne-
gative sequence impedance (VNI) loop for Q-V droop at fundamental
frequency. The virtual variable harmonic impedance (VVHI) enables
harmonic power sharing features at specific harmonic frequencies.
These frequencies are extracted by delayed-signal cancellation using a
second order generalized integrator (DSC-SOGI). This achieves high
accuracy of P-Q sharing, power quality with cost effective low-BW links.
A closed loop multi-layer control strategy for optimal power sche-
duling and voltage regulation is proposed in
Deckmyn, Vandoorn, Vyver, Desmet, and Vandevelde (2017). The
higher one called scheduling layer performs the day-ahead planning of
MG to minimize operating cost by UC for next 24 h. In middle execution
layer, the off line power flow analysis is done to get initial bus voltage
values (see Fig. 8). Lastly, lower adjustment layer maintains voltage
profile of MG by providing dynamic gains for DERs. This layer provides
feedback to the upper layer and iteratively voltage deviation and power
Fig. 8. Proposed multilayer control structure (Deckmyn et al., 2017).
132
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
sharing are managed. However, the dynamic response is observed to be
sluggish in nature. Similarly, two-level optimal power sharing, voltage
regulation, optimization of transmission loss in dc MGs is proposed in
Ma, Yuan, Zhao, and He (2017). The primary layer consists of a voltage
droop controller for each VSCs. The secondary layer aims to realize
optimal power flow to the loads. Advantage of this is that it doesn't
need prior information about grid's conductance and load distribution
matrices. But, its application is restricted to dc MGs only. Table 4 gives
complete summary of active and reactive power sharing for MGs.
4.4. Energy management system (EMS), market participation
4.4.1. Centralized control
Main objectives of energy management system (EMS) is that it
maintains smooth operation within a MG by exchange of surplus or
deficit power from upstream network, along with creating earning for
the MGs owner. As generally a microgrid is meant to operate under
grid-connected mode, it is essential to study the market participation of
the MG. Several MGs within small localities can be combined to form a
multi-MGs system thereafter seek permission from the distribution
system operator (DSO) or contact a registered aggregator to sell power
into the LV distribution network Parhizi, Khodaei, &
Shahidehpour, 2018). Hence, various concept of electricity market and
demand response management has to be studied in relation to MGs. As
this article is meant for control of MGs further discussion on these are
out of the scope and interested readers can find more on role and
working of aggregators, DSO in presence of MGs in Meng et al. (2016),
Nosratabadi, Hooshmand, and Gholipour (2017),
Palizban, Kauhaniemi, and Guerrero (2014) and the references therein.
The centralized control i.e. use of MGCC is done extensively to carry out
this objective. Early works on use of MGCC for load curtailment during
peak hours for an islanded MG is given in Zaidi and Kupzog (2008). At
the local level, it introduces control nodes (comprising power mea-
suring unit, wireless sensor and switch) connected with loads that to be
converted into intelligent loads and MGCC uses them as per priority and
control decision. This is also known as automated load management
and easy to implementation. In Tsikalakis and Hatziargyriou (2008),
economic optimization and market participation of MG with upstream
grid are studied in detail. Optimization problem is formulated for P
only, Q and security constraints were ignored. The demand side bidding
for non-critical loads (shiftable and interruptible) were included in two
market policies: operational cost minimization and maximizing profit
(see Fig. 9), as represented in ((13).
N L
Cost = i=1
active _bid (x i ) + AX + j=1
load _bid (yj )
N N N
Profit = A x
i=1 i i=1
active _bid (x i ) i=1
load _bid (yj ) (13)
An optimization and dispatch algorithm for MG is given in
Ding, Zhang, Mao, Yang, and Liu (2010). Four objective functions were
presented which minimized operational as well as depreciation cost,
while maximizing the comprehensive and environmental benefits.
Here, overall system is optimized, but, individual operation are only
able to achieve a sub-optimal solution. Also, handling of different ob-
jective functions increases computational burden and slows down the
process. An EMS based on the centralized control is built for an islanded
MG in Olivares, Cañizares, and Kazerani (2011). Whole problem of
energy management meant for complex mixed-integer nonlinear pro-
gramming (MINLP) is divided into two simpler sub-problems of UC by
mixed integer linear programming (MILP) and optimal power flow
(OPF) using nonlinear programming (NLP). This controller simplifies
the complex process without compromising much on accuracy. Simi-
larly, an optimal EMS for an isolated MG is discussed in
Olivares, Cañizares, and Kazerani (2014). Here, has two parts: UC and a
multi-stage Economic Load Dispatch (ELD) (see Fig. 10). It takes into
account the generation and load forecasting data and SoCs of BESS.
Later, calibration, tuning, impacts of forecasting and performance
 Table 4
Summary of active and reactive power sharing techniques for microgrids.
Design technique Authors Control principle Contribution Comments (Benefits/limitations)
S. Sen, V. Kumar

Centralized control (Yue et al., 2010) Proportional-Integral (PI) control An interfacing converter between the MG and upstream Maintains accurate power exchange between grid and MG, easy to
network. implement.
(Deng et al., 2013) Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) Control of interfacing converter for grid-connected MGs. Mitigates transmission of harmonic components from one side to
control other, P-Q sharing.
(Cavraro et al., 2016) Model-free master/slave control A two-stage strategy for power sharing and voltage regulation Achieves accurate P-Q sharing, avoid overvoltage at nodes.
of LV MGs.
Decentralized control (Divshali et al., 2012) PI control Modular controllers for power, voltage, current and output Manages dc-link voltage using one BESS, simple but, not accurate and
filter of each DERs to have P sharing. nor optimized.
(Golsorkhi & Lu, 2014) V-I droop control A new droop based power flow control of islanded MGs. Increases damping while decreasing time constant, better accuracy.
(Zhao et al., 2015) Distributed averaging PI (DAPI) A multi-objective control schemes for coordination, Optimal ED is achieved, minimum voltage deviations at steady-state.
control optimization of dc MG.
(Xin et al., 2016) PI control f-P droop scheme to achieve active power control of DERs Better efficacy and self-optimizing capability.
using local frequency measurements.
(Yang et al., 2016) Model-free control Decentralized current sharing scheme for dc MGs with multi- Achieves zero steady-state voltage error, simple to realize.
buses.
(He et al., 2016) PF-f droop control A P-Q sharing for series-connected micro converters to Non sensitive to variation in feeder impedances and filter parameters.
integrate DERs.
(Mousavi et al., 2018) Coordination control Regulation of VCM/CCM inverters for reactive power sharing Simple and low cost solutions of Q-V regulation, adaptive virtual
and harmonic compensation. impedance as considers set point changes.
(Xia et al., 2018) Coordination and droop control A multi-time scale power controller for hybrid MG with Includes generation capacities and load types, but, interconnecting
several interacting subgrids converters synchronization of DERs are not done.
Distributed control (Bolognani & Zampieri, 2011; 2013) Convex optimization and random First work on P-Q sharing and Q compensation using the Minimize power distribution losses, robust to load fluctuations but,
gossip-like algorithm distributed scheme costly and difficult to implement.
(Anand et al., 2013) Droop and digital average current Power/current sharing by DERs and voltage regulation in a dc Although stable and cost effective, doesn't meet dynamic
sharing (DACS) MG. requirements.

133
(Asad & Kazemi, 2014) Modular optimal pricing control A modular technique called optimal dc power sharing Reduced computations, robust against load variation, easy expansion
(ODCPS) for radial connected dc MGs. of DERs.
(Bidram et al., 2014; Cai et al., 2016) MAS A multi-objective voltage and current controlled strategies for Uses one-way communication facility, hence, economical and robust
inverter operated MGs. to communication failures.
(Nasirian et al., 2015; Nasirian et al., Droop-free cooperative control Voltage control and power sharing in dc and ac MGs Effectively regulates P, attains proportional load sharing and
2016) respectively. synchronizes the frequency.
(Wang et al., 2016) Averaging and PI control A secondary level power sharing schemes for dc MGs. Small voltage deviations are mitigated and current sharing accuracy is
enhanced.
(Peyghami-Akhuleh et al., 2016) PI controller A droop based method with two local MS controllers for Average voltage is regulated by using currents data, simple but, usage
voltage and current regulation. is only for dc MGs.
(Chang & Zhang, 2016) Bilinear matrix inequality (BMI) A distributed control framework for robust power sharing of Applicable for both mesh and radial topologies with mixed R/X
control VSIs in an autonomous ac MG. values, complex structure.
(Ahmadi et al., 2016) Consensus based tuned PI controllers A secondary level consensus based controller for Q sharing Take account of parameter uncertainties, communication channel is
and voltage regulation for islanded ac MGs. set by fuzzy logic.
(Hu et al., 2016) Optimal control Improved P-Q sharing including the generation limits of MSs. Eases computational burden, results into faster response and
enhanced accuracy.
(Zhang et al., 2017) PI based distributed consensus control A reactive power sharing technique under unmatched output Suppresses circulating current, adaptive virtual impedance, additional
impedance of DER interfacing inverters. DOF.
(Fan et al., 2017) Nonlinear state feedback controller Decoupled architecture for voltage control and Q sharing. Event-triggered control, reduces communication usage, more
accurate.
(Moayedi & Davoudi, 2017) Optimal control A scheme to simultaneously achieve proportional power Optimizer enforces inequality constraints, complexity is more due to
sharing and voltage regulation for dc MG. stochastic interferences.
(Wang et al., 2017) Optimal control Reactive power and voltage regulation by a Kalman based Dynamic response depends on coefficients of power error and voltage
state estimator and distributed controller. weight, slow action.
Distributed control (Li et al., 2017) MAS A two-layered network meant for optimal dispatch of power Two-graph communication network is used, achieves a near-optimal
in a MG. solution.
(Zhou et al., 2017) Consensus and PI control A droop controller for sharing the harmonic and imbalance Enhanced flexibility, reliable as doesn't need information of line
power to obtain a sinusoidal voltage. impedance.
(continued on next page)
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
 Table 4 (continued)

Design technique Authors Control principle Contribution Comments (Benefits/limitations)

(Zholbaryssov & Dominguez- Distributed networked algorithm P sharing controller using slow adjusting set point satisfying Always remain within stable zone, simultaneously regulates
S. Sen, V. Kumar

Garcia, 2017) phase-cohesive property in lossless MGs. frequency.

(Shafiee et al., 2017) PI controller
(Zhang et al., 2017) Consensus based control
(Meng et al., 2018) MAS-based discovery algorithm
(Cai & Hu, 2018) Leader-follower MAS and robust
control
Hierarchical control (Chamorro & Díaz, 2013) MAS with fuzzy tuned PD controller
(Rezaei & Kalantar, 2014) Mixed-integer linear programming
(MILP)
(Caldognetto et al., 2015) Adapted conservative power
algorithm
(Golsorkhi et al., 2016) Adaptive V-I droop controllers
(Baghaee et al., 2016) Artificial neural network (ANN) based
controller
(Han et al., 2016) Proportional plus multi-resonant
controller
(Deckmyn et al., 2017) Optimal control and GA
(Ma et al., 2017) Optimal control
A multi-functional secondary control strategy for ac MGs.
Distributed estimation and secondary controller (DESC) for
islanded MGs.
A fully distributed power sharing strategy for intermittent
RESs.
Power control within the ac MG with cluster of spatially
concentrated dispatchable DERs.
Two-level strategy for regulation of P-Q under both operating
modes.
Two-stage frequency management system and P-Q sharing of
an islanded MG
A three-layered architecture using conservative power theory
(CPT) for compensation of Q and voltage.
A two-level structure for load sharing and power quality
improvement in isolated ac MGs.
Novel ANN based Q set point calculation to improve power
sharing.
An enhanced P-Q sharing in an islanded ac MG.
A closed loop multi-layer strategy for optimal power
scheduling and voltage regulation.
Two-level optimal power sharing and optimization of
transmission loss in dc MGs.
Doesn't need f measurements, works as droop controller if link fails.
Accurate, accomplishes f regulation, but, has stability issues, more
complexity.
Need-based aperiodic (event based) data communication, includes
uncertainties.
Robust in achieving reference power output tracking, uses internal
model design for simplification.
Reconfigurable, fast synchronization, however, controller design is
complex.
Considers various stochastic scenarios, contingencies, but, bounded
for predefined range.
Acts as EMS also at master level, bring a certain level of optimization.
Eliminates voltage harmonics, failure issues arises due to use of GPS.
Enhances stability margins, is complex and has implementation
difficulties.
Highly accurate as suppresses harmonics, uses cost effective low-BW
links.
Serves day-ahead planning of MG, minimizes operating cost by unit
commitment.
Doesn't need prior information about grid's conductance and load
distribution matrices.

134
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
S. Sen, V. Kumar
Fig. 9. Information flow between MGCC and local controllers.
Fig. 10. Block diagram of centralized EMS.
evaluation are discussed. Results indicating a certain delayed dynamic
response, which is due to the inclusion of SoCs. Thereafter, Ambia, Al-
Durra, Caruana, and Muyeen (2014) presents another central super-
visory Control (CSC) unit meant for power management of hybrid MGs
comprising PVs, wind turbines and BESS. Here, the transient response
obtained is faster as multiple PE converters are used both in grid and
locals for smoothening out power fluctuations.
In Hajar, Hably, Bacha, Elrafhi, and Obeid (2016), a central MPC
based control system called global management controller (GMC) is
given. It works similar to EMS for a distribution network that co-
ordinates and optimizes the operation of interconnected MGs as well as
of distributed system operator (DSO). It includes forecasting data on
power generation, load demand and energy prices. The functioning of
RESs and BESSs are also handled using control unit of GMC. It has the
benefit of covering a larger geographical area. In Hajar et al. (2016),
same authors proposed nonlinear optimization algorithm to formulate
EMS with MPC. Inclusion of forecasts information improves the re-
presentation of actual operating scenario, but, the overall design is
highly complex. A heuristic master-slave architecture under both op-
erating modes is discussed in Almada, Leao, Ampaio, and Barroso
(2016). During islanded operation, the PEI for BESSs acts as a master
converter which defines V-f reference set points for remaining PEIs.
Similarly, during grid-tied operation PEIs at RESs plays masters’ role,
provides V-f set points at PCC. It also includes various uncertainties of
RESs and varying electricity tariffs along the day. Hence, opens new
scopes for active market participation of RESs based MGs.
4.4.2. Decentralized control
A decentralized EMS for coordinated operation of RESs and BESSs
using smooth switching droop control (SSDC) is given in
Wu, Tang, Dragicevic, Vasquez, and Guerrero (2015). It uses four dif-
ferent operating modes where RESs and BESSs work either in voltage
control mode (VCM) and power control mode (PCM) based on classical
PI/PID control principles. SSDC scheme uses frequency bus-signaling
(FBS) to decide, trigger mode switching. It achieves advantages of both
bus-signaling and droop control methods. However, it fails to economic
optimization of overall MG. A multi-agent based EMS for MG with
various RESs is presented in Karavas, Kyriakarakos, Arvanitis, and
135
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Papadaki (2015). Five agents were designed for each component of MG
i.e. RES, Battery, desalination, electrolyzer and fuel cell, so that mon-
itoring and control achieved and the MG is optimized. The theory of
fuzzy cognitive maps (FCM) is used for decision making. Particle swarm
optimization (PSO) is used to optimize working of agents for co-
ordinated operation. This decentralized EMS (DEMS) is compared with
centralized EMS (CEMS). Results suggesting performance of DEMS is on
par CEMS and in long run DEMS is economical. Similarly, in
Chen, Chen, Guerrero, and Abbott (2016), two-layer MAS based con-
troller is proposed. Lower layer constitutes the complete electrical
distribution of MG and its upper layer comprises of agents based net-
worked communication structure. These agents decide the control laws
for adjusting the DERs output as per local information. Though the
decoupled nature is easy to operate, it lacks the coordination to facil-
itate market participation of MG. In Xia, Peng, Hu, Wang, and Wei
(2016), a unified controller for dc MGs is presented. It serves various
purposes i.e. in grid-tied mode it can act as an EMS and provide ED by
injecting specified output current and during islanded mode, accurate
load sharing and directly regulates average bus voltage without any
extra secondary control loop. PI scheme is used for inner and outer
current control loops. This successfully presents a low cost control
scheme whose unified nature attains several attributes of centralized
EMS.
A demand response management algorithm is presented
inSakurama and Miura (2017). It uses a novel smart meters commu-
nication network topology based decentralized pricing. It computes
proper control signals by analyzing the prices and incentives. Optimi-
zation based on Lagrangian algorithm is implemented. However, its
overall structure is highly complex. In Nutkani, Loh, Wang, and
Blaabjerg (2017), a comprehensive ED method is proposed. Here, the
dispatch priority and droop coefficients of DERs are decided by taking
into account various factors viz. voltage, power and frequency limits of
MSs, generation cost and a number of participating DERs in economic
operation, and the required minimum online power reserves. Experi-
ments with three dispatchable MSs shows enhanced cost efficiency. It
also facilitates step-load changes within MG as desired online power
reserves can be set conveniently.
A load sharing and power management scheme with hybrid PV/
battery units for MGs is proposed in Karimi et al. (2017). By considering
the amount of available power from PV, load requirements, battery
conditions i.e. SoC, and the three modes of MG operations, the working
of each unit is divided into five states depending upon mismatches in
demand and generation. Modified P-f droop is used for load sharing
among the units according to operating states subject to the constraints
of power ratings. (14) presents functioning of the proposed method by
PI control. The switching between states is achieved via frequency level
triggering hence, requires less control efforts.
(
f = f0 + mp +
mi
s ) (P ref Pout )
(
Pref = mp +
mi
s ) (V dc V *dc)
(14)
Further details and definitions are available in Karimi et al. (2017).
The authors later extents this decentralized technique to hybrid MGs for
both single phase and three phase connections
(Karimi, Oraee, Golsorkhi, & Guerrero, 2017). A multi-functional robust
strategy for hybrid ac/dc MGs with nonlinear and unbalanced loads is
proposed in Baghaee, Mirsalim, Gharehpetian, and Talebi (2017). A
SMC controller for dc/dc converters for achieving proportional P-Q
sharing along with harmonics control presented. Thereafter, a two-level
hierarchical positive sequence power control using SMC and a negative
sequence current control using the Lyapunov function theory for ac side
of DERs is presented. These control strategies are independent of MG
topology and load characteristics.
S. Sen, V. Kumar
4.4.3. Distributed control
A control technique for PnP of RESs and reduction in power dis-
tribution loss is proposed in Costabeber, Tenti, Erseghe, Tomasin, and
Mattavelli (2011). Here, the communication is based on power line
carrier (PLC). Each active node transfers token (information packets)
sequentially to other active nodes, which is known as the token ring
method. Principle of optimal control and dynamic grid mapping fea-
tures were used, where each active node along with its neighboring
nodes are identified in real time and acted upon. Here, although cheap
means like PLC is used, additional infrastructure or setup is needed to
developed, which is not cost effective. The power management between
two interlinked MGs by optimal number of interlinking inverters is
proposed in Nutkani, Loh, and Blaabjerg (2012). The Q-V and P-f droop
schemes are used for controlling reactive and active power in the MGs
individually. For peak hours, interlinking inverters are optimally con-
trolled for reactive power support, while during light load conditions
active power is transferred among MGs. These inverters are turned off,
to minimize power loss if there is no usage. In Xu, Zou, and Niu (2013),
a distributed MPC as an optimal EMS that achieves a minimum excess/
insufficient energy in each MG for an interconnected MGs system is
proposed. These multi-MGs exchange power, data to maximize overall
energy efficiency. Required constraints are also included to achieve
guaranteed closed-loop stability. The prediction model uses one-step
delay, makes it able to capture more practical scenario. In Shafiee et al.
(2014), a consensus algorithm based on dynamic averaging for power
flow control among cluster of dc MGs is proposed. The reference is set
by a cooperative algorithm that takes into account SoC of BESSs inside
each of the MGs. It also presents a voltage controller to mitigate steady-
state voltage deviations in each MG. Also, an adaptive droop control is
implemented, where coefficients are chosen to equalize SoC. This
achieves extended feature of optimal storage, however, proposed
scheme doesn't facilitate grid interaction.
On a similar note, Hossain et al. (2014), Hossain, Mahmud, Milano,
Bacha, and Hably (2016) presents a distributed controller that mini-
mizes the negative or unnecessary dynamic interactions that occurs
among multiple islanded MGs, while controlling optimal power flow.
BESSs and STATCOMs are used to regulate P-Q power, respectively.
Proposed control is based on H2 and LMI strategy. Complicated steps
are required to be addressed to implement the controller however,
optimal response is resulted. Combined optimization of interconnected-
MGs (IMGs) to minimize the operating cost of multi-MGs is proposed in
Li, Liu, and Zhang (2015). It takes into account ultra-short term fore-
casting and further provides active power reference point for the dy-
namic droop controller, which works based on principle of equal gen-
eration incremental cost and PI methods. Design is simple and
forecasting improves practical MG scenario. A control of P sharing
between MG and utility grid is presented in Wang, Wu, and Zhang
(2015). It uses principle of equal incremental rate which attains the
minimum generation cost. Speed of controller is enhanced by updating
the control signal with latest local measurements using iterative and
distributed sub-gradient method. Communication links are of low-BW
as only incremental cost is exchanged by each agent. In (Zaery et al.,
2015), a cooperative controller that minimizes the power generation
cost in a dc MG is discussed. It compares the instantaneous generation
costs of each MS with weighted average of neighboring DERs. There-
after, adjusts the voltage reference point of local MS by generating a
voltage correction term as per the result. Benefit of this scheme is that,
it leads to production of more power by cheaper MSs. Also, as the ro-
bust spanning tree communication graph is used, prior knowledge of
number of MSs present in MG is not required.
A multi-objective control strategy for dc MGs is proposed in Zhaoa
and Dorfler (2015). It presents a primary droop controller that utilizes a
linear model, to achieve proper load sharing. However, it gives rise to
voltage drifts at steady-state, which is compensated by two control
strategies at the secondary level. A PI controller and consensus filter on
communication link performs the task of mitigating voltage drift and
136
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Fig. 11. Flowchart of optimization method (Liu et al., 2015).
optimal power injections. Another advantage is that it also achieves ED
by formulating an optimization problem based on quadratic with linear
constraints. Similarly, a load shedding problem for islanded MGs based
on distributed cost optimization (DCO) technique is proposed in
Liu et al. (2015). It consists of two layers: first being an improved
average consensus algorithm (IACA) for global information sharing of
monitored total active power deficiency and second being DCO using
MAS for load sharing by including overall and marginal costs. The
overall optimization flowchart is shown in Fig. 11. It not only provides
an accurate optimal load shedding but also meets PnP needs.
A cooperative multi-purpose control scheme for V-f control, power
sharing, MG and utility grid synchronization is proposed in
Hamidia, Livania, Hosseinianb, and Gharehpetian (2015). At primary
layer droop characteristics is used and its set points are decided by
cooperative controllers at secondary level, to minimize V-f deviation
and proportional power sharing among the MSs at tertiary level. Al-
though this controller is successful in performing aforementioned
functions within the MG, its working as EMS is not explored beyond just
reconnection and synchronization. In Stadler, Ashouri, and Marechal
(2016), MPC based control strategy for coordinated operation of DERs
is presented. The local MPC algorithms acts independently to find op-
timal reference points of controllable DERs, which in turn allows global
independent system operator (ISO) work as virtual power plant (VPP).
It improves ancillary services provided to DSO. As MGs’ demand fore-
casting is included, provides day-ahead load serving and peak saving.
A two level ED problem along with voltage regulation for a dc MG is
proposed in Zaery, Ahmed, and Orabi (2016). At the tertiary level,
normalized operating cost of DERs is put through dynamic consensus
based algorithm to solve ED for optimal load sharing among DERs. At
secondary level, average voltage of MG is controlled to satisfy the
constraint of supply-demand balance. This scheme ensures lower total
generation cost (TGC) and enhanced stability. It also provides PnP
features. Economic operation of a power park having several MGs is
proposed in Xiao, Zhang, Wang, and Xu (2016). The modified droop
scheme based upon the frequency/incremental cost (f/IC) of each MG is
used, which is also validated in comparison to conventional f/P droop.
Results suggest its ability to successfully ensure system reliability, is
more economical and has a faster response. A novel EMS based upon
dynamic population game theory is given in Mojica-Nava, Rivera, and
Quijano (2016). It uses distributed replicator dynamic method for ED
S. Sen, V. Kumar
considering power losses in feeders, over specific communication to-
pology. It employs two heuristic optimization algorithms to estimate
network loss coefficients under various demand patterns. Although it is
able to regulate frequency and simultaneously facilitate ED scheduling,
but, implementation difficulties in real scenario related to heuristic
search pattern is quite high.
A control strategy that combines the secondary level, small time-
scale automatic generation control (AGC) and large time-scaled tertiary
level ED is given in Li et al. (2016). Proposed scheme is called dis-
tributed economic AGC (EAGC) algorithm, and is based upon optimal
control method. It is capable to work in all modes of operation. Com-
munication topology is designed by satisfying the N-1 rule, which in-
creases system reliability. Similarly, a secondary control for optimal
power sharing and transmission loss reduction for dc MG is proposed in
Chen et al. (2016). It consists of three parts: (1) consensus based voltage
regulation, compensating primary droop caused voltage drift by gen-
erating voltage offset. (2) proportional current control, which attains
accurate power sharing during heavy load conditions. (3) tie line cur-
rent control, used under light load conditions to avoid transmission
losses. Although it is only limited to dc MGs, the analytical solutions
found on power flow with impacts of line resistance and drifts are
highly efficient.
In Xu et al. (2016), an ED problem of multi-MGs with PV-storage
combination is proposed. The distributed algorithm includes MPC
strategy along with time-sharing price to fix time and rate of power
supply to meet instantaneous load demand. During grid-connected
operation, economic results are obtained by solving optimal objective
function using generation-demand predictions. While in autonomous
mode the multi-objective function is solved using MGCC of each MGs
and receding-horizon optimization technique. Overall controller
strategy is simple and satisfactorily achieves desired objectives opti-
mally. A control strategy to combine functions of secondary level
maintain voltage profile and tertiary level minimized generation cost,
enhancing utilization of renewable sources in a dc MG is proposed in
Wang, Wu, and Zhang (2016). To achieve these, it uses a sub-gradient
algorithm and equal incremental rate (ICR) criteria. Here, only sparse
communication network is required to exchange generation ICRs be-
tween neighbours. This design has additional features like scalable and
flexible, reliable to communication failures and delays. In
Dorfler, Simpson-Porco, and Bullo (2016), distributed architecture
based upon averaging PI principle for ED at tertiary level is presented. It
establishes the need for droop control to attain economic optimization
by selecting droop coefficients for obtaining proportional power
sharing among the DERs. Here, DOF for EMS is more and discrepancies
are well compensated. A novel EMS for multi-MGs based upon dis-
tributed MPC (DMPC) and economic MPC (EMPC) are given in
Kou, Liang, and Gao (2016). The optimal coordination, power flow
between these MGs and distribution network is performed by DMPC.
While EMPC is employed as LCs to minimize operating cost of whole
distribution system. Forecasting is used to manage uncertainties in
generation and demand. Though design is a bit complex, its benefits on
multi-MG system are substantial. MAS based controller implemented
using modified diffusion communication scheme (called nudge me-
chanism) and optimal control principle is given
Azevedo, Cintuglu, Ma, and Mohammed (2017). The two-level struc-
ture with lower one meant for realizing an adaptive droop strategy to
regulate frequency and upper one is for implementing penalty-based
objective function subject to the generation limits for optimal MG
management. The proposed strategy is compared with the consensus
based algorithms and centralized control schemes. Simulation results
suggest it to be faster and utilize sparse information sharing.
A cascade distributed secondary level control structure for power
management of dc MGs is proposed in Vu et al. (2017). This type of
architecture avoids the mutual impacts of parallel controllers on each
other, which usually had degraded transient behavior. The proposed
scheme has inner power control loop, while outer voltage loop. The
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
complete design process is based upon the small-signal stability study of
developed MG model, this gives improved stability of complete system.
In Bersani, Dagdougui, Ouammi, and Sacile (2017), the problem of
power flow among IMGs is tackled using robust controller based on
cooperative decision principle. It helps to enhance service by mini-
mizing interaction with main utility grid by controlling maximum de-
viation from an agreed power exchange along with pre-set values of
storage units. The problem formulation is done using partially nested
information. In Li et al. (2018), a consensus averaging based algorithm
for control and management of islanded MG is discussed. Here, dis-
tributed and networked MAS is used to design the control law, which
has two terms: dynamic and fixed weights. The term having dynamic
weight adjusts the output of DERs to reach different desired targets. The
main advantage of this method is that during iterations the system
balance (obtained by primary layer) is never broken. A controller for
hybrid MGs to attain a global economic operation is proposed in
Lin et al. (2018). It consists of two levels: lower one has ac frequency-
incremental cost (f-IC) droop, dc bus voltage-incremental cost (V-IC)
droop realized at ac and dc subgrids, respectively. Later, a distributed
control canonical form (DCCF) is used to recover deviations at upper
level. It also suggests a novel relative loading index (RLI) to extract any
hidden loading conditions which help to easily define the references for
interlinking PE converters.
4.4.4. Hierarchical control
For EMS, an intermediate controller placed in-between the DSM and
MGCC hierarchically to have an optimal frequency regulation in multi-
MGs system is presented in Gil and Lopes (2007). It is called central
autonomous management controller (CAMC) which is under the au-
thority of DSO. It determines the change in generation set points of
DERs at MGCC based on frequency variation within MGs by using PI
control principle. Thereafter, in MGCC power generation by MSs is
optimized based upon a standard linear optimization method. Though it
is simple to realize, dynamic response is observed to be sluggish.
On a similar note, in Ding, Ma, Bi, Mao, and Chang (2013), a three
layered control architecture for energy coordination of isolated multi-
MGs is proposed. The lower layer is called distributed generation level,
having three agents: generation, storage and load agents, which con-
trols respective devices at LV level. The intermediate layer is known as
MG level, with four agents: MGCC, generation, storage and load agents
working at MV level. The upper layer called multi-MGs level has a
CAMC agent. All these agents were based on the foundation for in-
telligent physical agents (FIPA) which improves the speed of operation.
An operation and control of MGs with frequency stability is given in
Nakazawa, Murakami, Shimasaki, Hayashi, and Nakanishi (2013). The
RESs are considered as disturbances and using short term forecasting
information on demand and supply gaps, UC and ED to minimize cost
function of MG are solved in optimal operation layer. Later, frequency
stability is achieved in frequency control layer. Although this gives
decoupled scheme for EMS and frequency control which increases DOF,
it has a complex structure. Similarly, in Berkel, Görges, and Liu (2013),
a two level EMS using MPC is given. Lower layer works with a short
time scale (in secs) implements load frequency control (LFC), and upper
in
one having large time interval (minutes) realizes ED and UC. The
hierarchical MPC problem is formulated using a MILP, given in (15).
Advantage of this controller is that it includes charging/discharging
along with mobility of EVs using an optimization scheme.
Nu 1 NG 1 NEV
min [JG, i (k ) + JSA, i (k )] + JT (k ) + JEV , i (k )
k=0 i=1 i=1 (15)
A hierarchical control system for the interfacing converters between
ac and dc buses of a hybrid MG is proposed in Lu et al. (2014). Here, the
primary level implements decentralized PR based current control, PI
based voltage and droop control for power sharing. Voltage deviation
137
S. Sen, V. Kumar
arising from droop control is eliminated at secondary level by PI con-
troller. During grid-tied mode, power exchange between MG and ex-
ternal dc grids is controlled by tertiary level PI control. Design sim-
plicity makes it easy to use but, applicability is restricted to interface
hybrid MGs. In Che and Shahidehpour (2014), standard three-layered
architecture for economic and resilient operation of dc MGs is given.
Primary layer mimics the droop behaviour of ac MGs for power sharing
of among DERs using V-I droop, which is the main advantage of this
scheme. Secondary layer eliminates the voltage deviations by gen-
erating compensating voltage signal without modifying DER dispatch.
And, tertiary layer manages grid interactions and optimal dispatch of
DERs. A two-level master/slave structure for EMS is presented in Cai
and Mitra (2014). The upper one consists of MAS based power balance
controller, meant for maintaining equal demand-supply of P-Q. It uses a
fast three-sweep algorithm for real time operation. This layer also has
an ED, which provides control signals for slave controllers based on
comparison of incremental generation cost with neighboring DERs
generation agents. Here, the Lagrange function for ED is used as given
by (16), helps to include many objectives at a time, achieving optimi-
zation of whole MG. The lower layer follows the set points provided by
master layer.
n n n
L= Fi + PD Pi + i (P min + si2 Pi )
i Fig. 12. Hierarchical outage management scheme.
i=1 i=1 i=1
n
max
+ i (Pi ti2 Pi )
i=1
A three-level control of an energy hub having multi-source multi-
product (MSMP) viz. natural gas, thermal and electrical energy is pro-
posed in Xu, Jia, Wang, Yu, and Chiang (2015). The hierarchical EMS
has a control layer for each purpose: supervision, optimizing and ex-
ecution. The optimizing layer is further sub-divided into slow, medium
and fast for multi time-scale characteristic of the energy hub to ac-
commodate the dynamics of thermal, gas and electricity. Though dif-
ferent MSs and loads were controlled, it involves several implementa-
tion difficulties in terms of variable generation capacities, rating and
dynamic characteristics.
A control system with optimization of dc MGs operation by SoC
balancing of BESSs and enhancing overall efficiency is discussed in
Meng, Dragicevic, Vasquez, Guerrero, and Sanseverino (2015). In its
lower layer a primary droop controller is used, while at intermediate
level, secondary voltage restoration using PI control is implemented. At
tertiary level, objective function is formulated incorporating the feeder
power loss and SoC deviations and solved by genetic algorithm (GA) at
MGCC to have optimal load sharing. Virtual resistance of the DERs are
considered as actual decision making variables, giving the benefit of
improved power quality. In Sanseverino et al. (2015), the tertiary
control layer is further divided into two sub-levels: EMS and tertiary
optimal power flow regulation. The EMS is designed using a linear cost
minimization objective function subject to demand-supply balance
constraints, which is solved by using MILP. It provides inputs for
scheduling of DERs, which is passed on to lower sub-level optimizer by
EMS. Rolling horizontal method is used to solve optimal power flow
problem, which gives an error free steady-state response.
A three-layer MG control strategy is presented in Zhang, Liu, Zhao,
and Wang (2015). Here, local layer realizes a voltage regulator based
on an adaptive 3rd order sliding-mode direct voltage loop and virtual
negative impedance droop based power control. Middle cooperative
layer is meant for steady-state V-f control based upon PI method, also
accomplishing the phase synchronization to initiate grid connection.
Highest scheduling layer provides power exchanges. Although issues of
increased computational burden is present, the adaptive and fast
switching control action enables improved transient responses. It also
helps to achieve seamless mode transitions. Lv, Ai, and Zhao (2015)
proposes a multi-purpose bi-level optimal coordination of grid-tied
MGs. Upper level controller determines optimal dispatch of utility so
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
that power losses are minimized and enhanced voltage profile is ob-
(16) tained. Objective function optimization problem is solved through a
self-adaptive GA and nonlinear programming method combined. Re-
ference signals are sent to LC of individual DERs to achieve optimal
operation and reduced cost. Results on IEEE 33 bus system shows its
better performance when compared to traditional dispatch, however,
here complexity is increased.
A two-stage hierarchical scheme for outage management to have an
enhanced resiliency for a multi-MGs system is given in
Farzin, Firuzabad, and Moeini-Aghtaie (2016). Here, first stage consists
of a MPC strategy for MG scheduling during any utility outage (see
Fig. 12). At second stage, unused resilient resources of each MGs are
coordinated by DSO for facilitating power transfer to unserved loads.
Optimization problem is formulated on MILP, integrating tie-line cost
for load lost risk. This EMS design serves the need of increased relia-
bility of MGs hence, has scope for realizing the smart grid features. The
same authors extended this work further to propose a stochastic EMS to
accommodate the unscheduled islanding events in Farzin, Firuzabad,
and Moeini-Aghtaie (2017). It gives an optimal scheduling of different
MSs under prevailing uncertainties. Reduced risk of load loss and
simplified resynchronization with the main grid are some of its im-
mediate benefits. Similarly, two level power management and co-
ordinated operation of grid-tied dc MGs is proposed in Yang et al.
(2016). The primary layer used SoC based droop control for the BESSs
interfacing dc-dc converters to achieve dynamic power sharing. Along
with that, the V-P droop is implemented at PCC for bidirectional power
exchange. The secondary layer uses voltage based droop shifting to
restore bus voltage within rated value and SoC droop charging/dis-
charging balancing to have optimal system operation. Slower dynamics
and applicability to dc MGs only are its limitations. A bi-layer opera-
tional optimization between DSO and MGs is proposed in
Bahramara, Moghaddam, and Haghifam (2016). Upper leader layer
maximizes DSO profit, while lower follower layer has to minimize
overall MG cost. The formulated bi-level nonlinear model is converted
into single-level linear one using Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) criteria
and dual theory. This ascertains robust and stable characteristics of the
controller by allowing easier computation of set points. A two level EMS
for a cluster of MGs in distribution network is proposed in Lu et al.
2017. The upper layer is meant for reducing the power losses, voltage
deviation and to minimize fluctuations in power sharing. While mini-
mization of operating cost, emission in MGs are objectives of lower
138
 Table 5
Summary of energy management system (EMS) techniques for microgrids.
Design technique Authors Control principle Contribution Comments (Benefits/limitations)
S. Sen, V. Kumar

Centralized control (Zaidi & Kupzog, 2008) Self-configurable control nodes First work on use of MGCC for load curtailment during Control nodes act as intelligent local controller, easy to realize.
peak hours.
(Tsikalakis & Hatziargyriou, 2008) Optimal control Economic optimization and market participation with Demand side bidding, minimization of operational cost and
upstream grid. maximizing profit.
(Ding et al., 2010) Optimal control An optimization and dispatch algorithm for MG. Environmental benefits, complex and slow process, sub-optimal
solution.
(Olivares et al., 2014) MILP and MPC An EMS that converts a nonlinear problem to simple Simplification is achieved without compromising much upon
linear and optimal control problem. accuracy.
(Ambia et al., 2014) PI controller Central supervisory Control (CSC) for power management Faster response, smoothens out power fluctuations.
of hybrid MG.
(Hajar et al., 2016) MPC Global management controller (GMC) for distribution Includes of forecasts information, but, overall design is complex.
system.
(Almada et al., 2016) Heuristic algorithm A heuristic master-slave architecture for EMS of ac MGs. Includes uncertainties of RESs, varying electricity tariffs along the
day.
Decentralized control (Wu et al., 2015) PI/PID control EMS for coordinated operation of RESs and BESSs using Has advantages of bus-signaling and droop control methods, but,
smooth switching droop control (SSDC). fails in economic optimization.
(Karavas et al., 2015) Fuzzy cognitive maps (FCM) and A multi-agent based EMS for a MG with various types of Comparatively economical, overall optimization is achieved.
MAS RESs.
(Li et al., 2016) MAS Decoupled EMS, separate electrical distribution and Easy to operate but, lacks coordination to facilitate market
communication. participation.
(Xia et al., 2016) PI control Unified multi-purpose controller for dc MG under both Provides stable design and immune to communication failures,
operating modes. time-delays.
(Sakurama & Miura, 2017) Decentral optimization Algorithm A demand response management algorithm using smart Optimization is done using Lagrangian algorithm, overall design
meters communication network topology. is highly complex.
(Nutkani et al., 2017) Cost-prioritized Optimization Comprehensive ED for islanded MGs with minimum Facilitates step-load changes, easy to realize, possible to set

139
online reserve. online reserve.
(Karimi et al., 2017) Modified P-f droop and PI control Load sharing and power management scheme for hybrid Uses frequency level triggering hence, reduced control effort,
PV/battery MGs. more accuracy.
(Baghaee et al., 2017) Sliding mode control (SMC) A multi-functional robust strategy for MG with nonlinear/ Independent of MG topology and load characteristics, faster
unbalanced load. response.
Distributed control (Costabeber et al., 2011) Optimal control Controller for PnP of RESs and reduction in power Uses PLC for communication, not Considered to be cost effective.
distribution loss.
(Nutkani et al., 2012) Droop control A power management between interlinked MGs by an Minimize power loss and simultaneously supports reactive power.
optimal number of interlinking inverters.
(Xu et al., 2013) MPC An optimal EMS achieving minimum excess/insufficient Guaranteed closed-loop stability, uses a one-step delay as in
energy in a MG. actual scenario.
(Shafiee et al., 2014) Consensus and adaptive control Dynamic averaging based power flow control among Extended feature of optimal storage, but, doesn't facilitate grid
cluster of dc MGs. interaction.
(Hossain et al., 2014; Hossain et al., 2016) H2 and LMI Controller to minimize negative interactions among Optimal response is obtained, complex implementation.
multiple MGs, and keeping optimal power flow.
(Li et al., 2015) PI control Optimization of interconnected-MGs to minimize the Controller design is simple, forecasting improves practical MG
operating cost. scenario.
(Wang et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2016) Sub-gradient algorithm A control of active power sharing between MG and utility Equal incremental rate attains minimum generation cost, faster
grid. control action.
(Zaery et al., 2015) Cooperative control Controller based on instantaneous generation cost to Produces of more power by cheaper MSs, prior knowledge of MSs
minimize the power generation cost in dc MGs. number is not required.
(Zhaoa & Dorfler, 2015) PI control A multi-objective controller for dc MGs to achieve droop, Mitigates voltage drift, optimal power injections and ED.
load sharing.
(Liu et al., 2015) MAS Load shedding of MGs by distributed cost optimization Optimal load shedding, considers overall and marginal costs,
(DCO) technique. facilitates PnP.
(Hamidia et al., 2015) Cooperative control Multi-purpose controller: V-f control, P-Q sharing, grid Working as EMS is not explored beyond just reconnection and
synchronization. synchronization.
(Stadler et al., 2016) MPC Control strategy for coordinated operation of DERs. Provides day-ahead load serving and peak saving, better ancillary
services.
(continued on next page)
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
 Table 5 (continued)

Design technique Authors Control principle Contribution Comments (Benefits/limitations)

(Zaery et al., 2016) Consensus control Economic dispatch problem (EDP) and voltage regulation Ensures a lower total generation cost (TGC) and enhanced
S. Sen, V. Kumar

for a dc MG. stability, PnP.

(Xiao et al., 2016) Modified droop control
(Mojica-Nava et al., 2016) Replicator dynamics controller
Distributed control (Li et al., 2016) MAS and consensus control
(Chen et al., 2016) Consensus control
(Xu et al., 2016) MPC and receding-horizon
optimization
(Dorfler et al., 2016) Averaging PI control
(Kou et al., 2016) MPC
(Azevedo et al., 2017) MAS and optimal control
(Vu et al., 2017) PI controller
(Bersani et al., 2017) Robust and cooperative Control
(Li et al., 2018) Consensus averaging algorithm and
MAS
(Lin et al., 2018) Incremental cost droop and
canonical based control
Economic operation of a power park having several MGs
using frequency/incremental cost (f/IC).
A novel EMS based upon dynamic population game
theory and heuristic search algorithm.
A strategy that combines small time-scale AGC and large
time-scale ED.
Secondary controller for optimal power sharing and
transmission loss reduction for dc MG.
ED problem of multi-MGs with PV-storage combination.
A distributed architecture for ED at tertiary level and
droop control.
New EMS for multi-MGs based upon distributed MPC
(DMPC) and economic MPC (EMPC).
Optimized MG operation by adaptive droop with penalty
generation limits
A cascade distributed secondary level control structure for
power management of dc MGs.
The problem of power exchange among IMGs is tackled.
Control and management of islanded MGs using dynamic
weights.
A controller for hybrid MGs to attain global system
economic operation.
Reliable, more economical and has faster response than
conventional droop.
Considers feeders power losses, but, implementation difficulties
in real scenario.
More reliable as (n-1) rule of used, applicable to both modes.
Highly efficient analytical solutions on power flow, restricted
application to dc MGs only.
Time-sharing price is used to fix time, rate of power supply to
meet instantaneous load demand.
More DOF for EMS and discrepancies are well compensated.
Forecasting is used to manage uncertainties, however, it has a
complex design structure.
Faster response and utilizes sparse information sharing.
Improved stability, better transient dynamics.
Needs partially nested information, controls maximum power
deviation.
During iterations the system balance (obtained by primary) is
never broken.
Relative loading index (RLI) to extract any hidden loading
conditions.the day.

140
Hierarchical control (Gil & Lopes, 2007) PI control Central autonomous management controller (CAMC) at Simple to realize, but, dynamic response is sluggish.
DSO level.
(Ding et al., 2013) MAS A three layered architecture for energy coordination of Usage of intelligent physical agents improves the speed of
isolated multi-MGs. operation.
(Nakazawa et al., 2013) Optimal control Operational control structure for MGs with frequency Increases DOF, RESs are considered as disturbances, complex
stability. design structure.
(Berkel et al., 2013) MPC and MILP A two-level EMS with lower level frequency control and Includes charging/discharging along with mobility of EVs for
upper level ED and unit commitment. optimization.
(Lu et al., 2014) PI and PR controllers Controller for interfacing converters between ac-dc buses Simple to design, only applicable to interfacing converter of
of hybrid MG. hybrid MG.
(Che & Shahidehpour, 2014) V-I droop Standard architecture for economic and resilient Eliminating voltage deviation without modifying DER.
operation of dc MGs.
(Cai & Mitra, 2014) MAS Two-level master/slave structure for EMS of islanded Achieves optimization of overall system, easy to realize.
MGs.
(Xu et al., 2015) Optimal control Control of energy hub with multi-source multi-product Implementation difficulties for variable generation capacities,
(MSMP). rating, dynamics.
(Meng et al., 2015) PI control tuned with genetic A hierarchical control system with optimization of dc MGs Obtain optimal load sharing, improved power quality.
algorithm (GA) operation by SoC balancing of BESSs.
(Sanseverino et al., 2015) MILP and rolling horizontal method Tertiary control layer is into a two sub-levels: EMS and Error free steady-state response, attains better optimization.
tertiary optimal power flow regulation.
(Zhang et al., 2015) PI and Sliding mode control (SMC) Third order control strategy for voltage regulation and Improved transient responses, seamless mode transitions, but,
droop based power control. increased computational burden.
(Lv et al., 2015) Self-adaptive GA and nonlinear A multi-purpose bi-level optimal coordinated operation of Better performance than traditional ED, however, complexity is
programming method. grid-tied MG and upstream network. also higher.
(Farzin et al., 2016;Farzin, Firuzabad, & MPC and MILP A two-stage scheme for outage management to have an Facilitates power transfer to unserved loads, smart grid features
Moeini-Aghtaie, 2017) enhanced resiliency for multi-MGs system. can be added.
(Yang et al., 2016) PI controller Power management and coordinated operation of grid- Droop shifting to restore bus voltage, slow dynamics, applicable
tied dc MGs. to dc MGs.
(continued on next page)
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
S. Sen, V. Kumar Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151

level. Based on game theory, interactions among the MGs and utility

Cost effective and synergic participation model, however more

network is model by an interactive game matrix (IGM) and optimized

Minimizes deviations between planned energy exchange and

by GA. Although complex to implement, it serves an important issue of
lowering the emissions.

actual one, but, it doesn't capture whole MG dynamics.

Ascertains robust and stable characteristics, simplified

Lowers emissions, however, complex implementation.

In Cominesi, Farina, Giulioni, Picasso, and Scattolini (2018, a two-
layer controller for EMS of multiple sources, storage and non-pre-
dictable loads is given. Higher level works as optimizer with slow
timescales (15 mins) and relies on simplified global MG model. It de-
cides nominal operating condition of MG over a long time horizon. The
lower level functions at a sampling time of 1 minute using stochastic

Comments (Benefits/limitations)
MPC. It reduces deviations between planned energy exchange and ac-
tual, accounting fast-rate stochastic fluctuations. Issue in this control
scheme is in using a discretized simple model which doesn't capture the
dynamics of complete MG. A robust EMS considering static modelling
of system frequency is discussed in Rezaei, Ahmadi, Khazali, and

computation.
Guerrero (2018). It formulates an energy and reserve management

complex.
design on frequency dependent characteristics of DERs. Later, in-
formation gap decision theory (IGDT) is used to handle MG un-
certainties and whole architecture is converted into single level MILP

Two-layer controller for EMS of multiple sources, storage

model to solve over a 24 h scheduling horizon. Although this gives a

A robust EMS considering the static modelling of system

Bi-layer operational optimization between the DSO and
cost effective and synergic participation model for both functions and

A two level EMS for cluster of MGs in distribution

demand response provider, computational complexity is increased en-
ormously. Summary of EMS of MGs is presented in Table 5.

4.5. Miscellaneous function

4.5.1. Centralized control

4.5.1.1. Battery management system (BMS). After discussing various

and non-predictable loads.

important control functionalities of MGs, still there are several other
substantial areas where the aforementioned control techniques are
applied. In this section, these objectives are presented as the
miscellaneous functions within a MG, which categorized into same
Contribution

frequency.
four control schemes as done earlier. In Qian, Zhang, Lai, and Yu
network.

(2011), a battery management system (BMS) controlling circuitry for

MGs.

charge-equalization of each cell by using the estimates of SoC is given.

For seamless power transfer between BESS and feeders, a dual-buck
half-bridge bidirectional ac-dc converter is used along with quasi-PR
Information gap decision theory
Dual theory and Karush-Kuhn-

scheme combined by an admittance compensator. It has features to

enable precision power flow and is successfully able to dictate the
working of BMS and interfacing inverter.
Game theory and GA

(IGDT) and MILP

Control principle

Stochastic MPC

4.5.1.2. Integrating electric vehicles (EVs). In Abdelaziz, Shaaban, Farag,

Tucker criteria

and El-Saadany (2014), a multi-stage centralized control strategy to

accommodate high penetration of Electric Vehicles (EVs) in an islanded
MG is proposed. The MGCC is designed with 3-stage droop based
optimal power flow schemes which fulfill several objectives. Firstly, it
minimizes the load shedding during insufficient generation, thereafter,
minimizing MGs’ operating cost and maximize EVs usage. Two
operating cases i.e. MG with and without adequate generation were
studied to validate effectiveness and robustness of proposed controller.

4.5.1.3. Coordination of RESs and BESSs. A centralized controller for

(Bahramara et al., 2016)

coordinated operation of various components viz. RESs, BESSs and

(Cominesi et al., 2018)

loads in is given in Diaz, Luna, Vasquez, and Guerrero (2017). Control

(Rezaei et al., 2018)

system is mainly having three supervisory tasks: active power

(Lu et al., 2017)

interruption to avoid batteries overcharging, load shedding to prevent

deep discharging, SOC equalization. It has the benefit of optimal
Authors

scheduled connection algorithm for loads, which reduces connection/

disconnection cycles, leading to increased life span of batteries.
Diaz et al. (2017) uses a novel MAS based on robot soccer
Table 5 (continued)

coordination strategy. It defines in prior, different tactics for DERs,

Design technique

BESS to operate in a specified collaborative manner viz. power balance

and power curtailment among DERs, SoC equalization, load shedding,
when operated in different roles: grid forming and grid following.
Advantage of proposed scheme is that, the used holistic system
algorithm which works on a knowledge-based task assignment,

141
S. Sen, V. Kumar
enabling priority wise coordination. This method is limited by complex
implementation architecture.
4.5.1.4. Power quality improvement. In Wang, Blaabjerg, Chen, and
Guerrero (2011), a selective harmonic compensator is proposed,
which removes ‘whack-a-mole’ effect from voltage waveform using
low-BW channel as the harmonic signals are transmitted through it after
performing Park transformation. PI based regulators were used to
compensate the harmonics. Along with that, LCs for DERs were
developed for effective nonlinear load sharing among themselves.
Although this method is quite effective for the transient disturbances,
it doesn't give a smooth steady-state response. In Tan, So, Chu, and
Chen (2013), MPC based power quality improvement strategy is given.
It integrates an extended Kalman filter (EKF) to estimate grid frequency
and extract harmonic spectra from V-I waveforms. Different test
conditions viz. load sharing, power factor correction, grid voltage sag
and swells were studied and results suggests it is capable to handle wide
varieties of power quality issues of MGs.
A master/slave principle based control scheme to enhance the
power flow among the three phases of a MG is presented in
Brandao et al. (2017). Central master controller located at PCC pro-
cesses unbalanced P-Q power terms and directs local slave controllers at
DERSs to proportionally share them. This method is also known as
conservative power theory (CPT). Simulation was performed on real
urban weak LV distribution network having asymmetric and non-si-
nusoidal phase voltages, results suggesting efficacy for smoothening
persistent fluctuations.
4.5.1.5. Polygeneration. The microgrids designed for remote location
having a cold weather and at coastal area or islands with less drinking
water facilities needs additional features viz. room heating, potable
water by desalination, natural gas and hydrogen fuels etc. These are
called the cogeneration or polygeneration microgrids
Jana, Ray, Majoumerd, Assadi, and De (2017). As it involves several
type of sources, therefore its controllers are can be suitably realized
using one of the four control approaches. In this regard (Bracco et al.,
2015) gives a centralized EMS consisting of a dynamic optimization
model formalized to the University of Genova smart polygeneration
microgrid (SPM) along with sustainable energy building (SEB) testbed.
It uses forecast data from the SCADA system and later, real time
scheduling of different sources is done using a MPC based algorithm. It
involves detailed electrical grid and power losses, EVs carbon footprint
and economic assessment. Basic advantage of this method is the
inclusion of on/off status of the microsources which allows to
customize various optimization scenario by receding horizon technique.
4.5.2. Decentralized control
4.5.2.1. Battery management system. In Xu, Xiao, Hu, Wang, and Lee
(2017), control for hybrid energy storage system (HESS) i.e. battery and
supercapacitor is proposed. The battery converter is regulated by a
high-pass filter droop (HPFD) while a virtual capacitor droop (VCD) is
implemented for controlling the supercapacitor converter. The issues
like accurate dynamic power sharing, SoC balance violation, steady
state bus voltage restoration are handled successfully. Advantage of this
method is that it not only ensures continuous operation of HESS but,
acts as an effective power buffer as the included supercapacitor has
faster dynamics. Multi-agent scheme based nonlinear SMC for SoC
balancing is given in Morstyn, Savkin, Hredzak, and Agelidis (2017).
Depending on the net load, all batteries are either in charging or
discharging mode so, prevent circulating current by avoiding
unnecessary charging/discharging cycles. Whenever the SoC of any
battery reaches boundary layer around average of its neighbours’ SoC
level, its nonlinear SMC switches to a linear strategy therefore, prevents
chattering. The SoC controller is later integrated with existing MAS
based secondary voltage regulation and current sharing control
strategies. This achieves faster SoC balancing, avoids battery
142
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
overloading and facilitates PnP capabilities.
4.5.2.2. Coordination of RESs and ESSs. The coordination of several
DERs under various topologies: ring, meshed and arbitrary complex is
discussed in Cucuzzella, Incremona, and Ferrara (2017). The MG model
of is developed by a simple incidence matrix considering all node
connection parameters, unknown load dynamics, system nonlinearities
and modeling uncertainties. Thereafter, two control strategies based
upon suboptimal second and third order SMCs are presented. Its
benefits are that it works on the locally available voltage information
and results of stability analysis establish that the proposed control
scheme has asymptotic behaviour.
4.5.2.3. Parallel operation of VSCs. A control strategy for operation of
MG with high penetration of VSCs is proposed in Ovalle, Ramos, Bacha,
Hably, and Rumeau (2015). It considers VSC and LC filter combination
as a current source. This controller has only the knowledge of
inductance and capacitance of filter, while all other line parameters
are unknown. Also, it applies the instantaneous power theory by
measuring/calculating V-I using theoretical methods, making
computations easy. In Tavakoli, Negnevitsky, and Muttaqi (2017), a
MPC based voltage control and discrete SMC based current control of
inverters interfaced MSs is proposed. A test system is built using three
MSs with variable RLC loads. Thereafter, a performance comparison of
proposed controller with a benchmark robust servomechanism (RSM)
controller is performed. Simulation results suggest that control scheme
is able to perform at par with RSM and has fast transient response and
tracking, robustness against unbalanced load transients and short
circuit conditions.
4.5.2.4. Polygeneration. In Kyriakarakos, Piromalis, Dounis, Arvanitis,
and Papadakis (2013) a MAS intelligent demand side management for
an autonomous type polygeneration MG topology is proposed. Each of
the agents have a well described Percepts, Actions, Goals and
Environment (PAGE). Here, the environment is taken to be non-
deterministic and inaccessible i.e. using grey prediction algorithms
only complete structure is implemented. Under overloading, it is
successfully able to turn off loads progressively without collapsing,
hence, operations near the rated limits is possible. Similarly, in
Karavas et al. (2015) also, a MAS and fuzzy cognitive mapping based
EMS of polygeneration MG is given. Three different of commodities i.e.
hydrogen, water, electricity were produced and stored as per the
decentralized decision making principle. Later, its results are
compared with centralized polygeneration control structure which is
observed to be at par with it.
4.5.3. Distributed control
4.5.3.1. Battery management system. A two level control strategy for
BESS is proposed in Zhang, Cai, He, and Liu (2014). LCs consists of
micro-bank modules (MBMs) which includes a cell bank, micro-BMS
and a dc-dc converter while connected to central BMS by CAN bus. By
taking into account the effect of battery recovery because of its
intermittent discharging, a self-reconfigurable controller is used to
provide an optimal scheduling by calculating SoCs of each battery in
real-time. Some of its benefits are: reduced volume of BMS, no
overcharge issue, improved discharging efficiency and lower idling
time. In Li et al. (2014), SoC equalization of dc MG based on a MAS
algorithm is presented. Each battery unit is regarded as an agent that
sets its own reference voltage based on an average consensus algorithm
so as to equalize SoC. By doing so, system stability is better maintained
as compared to controlling the droop gain. Same authors used this
strategy in Li et al. (2017), on ac MGs where the frequency set point is
scheduled instead of droop gain. Both these methods have faster
transient response as compared to conventional droop scheme.
Cooperative control of BESS using a two subsystems scheme: one for
charging, another during discharging modes of battery units is given in
S. Sen, V. Kumar
Hosseinimehr, Ghosh, and Shahnia (2016). It also accomplishes the
tasks of P-Q sharing among BESS units. A SoC based droop scheme is
developed to avoid fast depletion of units during discharging operation.
During charging, a PI controller is used to limit the units from
overcharging surplus power from RESs. The Q assistance is also
achieved by an adaptive virtual impedance (AVI) control. While this
is highly effective but, the control architecture is too complex.
A secondary level BMS for a dc MG based upon dc-bus signaling
(DBS) and compensating virtual droop impedance of BESSs is proposed
in Oliveira, Silva, and Donoso-Garcia (2017). Depending upon magni-
tude of SoC disparity (between each storage unit and average SoC),
output current is generated to force charge equalization during both
charging/discharging modes. Here, use of convergence factor is done
for speeding up the SoC balancing, and its tradeoffs with voltage de-
viation and interference are also discussed. A distributed control
scheme for several PVs and BESS hybrid units is proposed in
Golsorkhi et al. (2017). It is divided into two levels: primary level with
decentralized V-I droop and secondary level with coordinated leader-
follower method. The average MG voltage is restored by the leader,
while the follower balances SoC by managing power sharing among
BESS. The proposed scheme is simple and easy to implement on large
scale MGs but, it has slower dynamics. Voltage control of MGs using
coordination of multiple electric springs (ESs) to mitigate uncertainty in
RESs is proposed in Chen, Hou, and Hui (2017). At first, a controller for
single ES unit is designed by PR principle. Thereafter, using information
sharing among neighboring units, a consensus based algorithm is de-
veloped to assign reference voltages for multiple ESs. This method has
advantages of achieving synchronization of new ESs unit because it uses
of local variables only. Comparison conducted with conventional droop
strategy shows its improved capabilities in maintaining voltage level of
critical loads. On a similar note in Nasirian, Yadav, Lewis, and Davoudi
(2017), a collective and fully distributive control for operation of power
buffers using sparse communication for a dc MG is given. Each of the
critical load is interfaced via power buffer, which uses local measure-
ments to set a desired energy profile during transients. It also manages
energy reservoirs to supply high quality power to the grid.
4.5.3.2. Coordination of RESs and BESSs. Seamless operation of DERs
and participation in frequency response, power sharing in both grid-
tied and islanded modes is presented in Karami, Seifi, and
Mohammadian (2016). It uses a droop scheme based on power angle
for power sharing among DERs during islanded operation and
supplying constant power under grid-tied, without the requirement of
any switching over from one mode to another. PnP capability and
stability analysis of the proposed controller is discussed using a
developed state-space model. Auto mode adapting of the controller is
definitely an additional feature. Coordination of multiple PMSG based
wind turbines in a dc MG to maintain demand-supply balance and
achieving optimal load sharing is given in Kou, Liang, and Gao (2017).
Grid side converter (GSC) is controlled by two levels: upper one consists
of MPC approach to optimize parallel connected interfacing buck
converters in a cooperative way. It generates the reference power set
points, which are input for lower layer PMSG pitch angle controllers.
Advantage of this scheme is that along with controlling an ac
microsource in a dc MG, it achieves system-wide objectives.
Distributed decision-making units that depend upon the knowledge
based fuzzy inference systems for coordination of RESs and BESSs for is
given in Diaz, Vasquez, and Guerrero (2018). The data sharing is
achieved via voltage-frequency bus-signaling scheme with neighboring
units to have a global level operational perspective. It considers various
stages, constraints to attain SoC balancing of batteries, achieves
appropriate charging profiles and power curtailment for noncritical
loads. Even with these benefits, this design is highly complex and has
slow transient features.
4.5.3.3. MG synchronization. A cooperative scheme for seamlessly
143
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
active synchronization of MG with utility grid is presented in
Sun et al. (2016). The synchronization correction signals are
generated from small-signal stability analysis and later used by
voltage controllers to be transmitted to leader DERs only via sparse
communication links. Each DER unit shares data with its neighbours,
voltage at PCC is synchronized by consensus. Low cost, simple approach
are its main advantages which are aided by stable operation.
4.5.3.4. Prevention of cyber-attack on communication links. In (Lu et al.
(2016), secondary level control strategy that mitigates effects of
malicious communication link attacks is discussed. The primary level
is of P-f droop and secondary level has consensus optimization
algorithm which is updated by dual-ascent method. It also achieves
nominal frequency and proper power sharing. Two attack models or
adversary inputs i.e. link- and node-based were tested upon MG
communication channel. Results show it is quite efficient to nullify
link failures.
4.5.3.5. Power quality improvement. A distributed consensus algorithm
(DCA) for sharing of the negative sequence current is given in
Meng et al. (2016). The MSs are controlled to compensate for voltage
unbalances by performing a detailed unbalance analysis, which also
improves overall power quality of the MG. The experimentation results
suggest it has an enhanced system flexibility to execute the PnP feature
of incoming/outgoing DERs.
4.5.3.6. Stability enhancement. In Wu and Shen (2017), an optimal
controller at secondary level is proposed for stable and robust operation
under various MG operating conditions. It helps in attaining desired
dynamic performances i.e. fast response, proper damping and stability
margin. A complete stability analysis on the developed unified small-
signal based dynamic model of a resistive MG is done to establish a
mechanism to mitigate the undesirable dynamics and oscillations at
secondary layer. This helps to achieve increased stability margins under
different scenarios.
4.5.3.7. Polygeneration. A dynamic market mechanism (DMM) for a
CHP microgrid based on distributed scheme is proposed in Nudell et al.
(2017). It uses the latest up-to-date estimates of thermal and electric
loads and the renewables hence, allows the PnP features of the BESSs,
RESs or a new smart building without reformulating the optimization
problem. The testbed at University of Genova is considered to obtain
the market clearing price and set points for thermal and electric
components along with non-binding estimates of these variables. The
computational complexity of the proposed method is found to be
reduced due to the usage convex optimization technique.
4.5.3.8. Market participation. In Iggland, Wiget, Chatzivasileiadis, and
Anderson (2015), an optimal power flow (OPF) for economically
efficient generation dispatch in multi-area hybrid MGs i.e. HVAC and
HVDC is proposed. This method gives a distributed optimization
algorithm using the linearized OPF formulation. It considers three
operating scenario for the multi-area HVDC grid. Advantage of the
proposed method lies in the fact that it uses less number of variables for
data exchange, and hence, reduces the amount of computations per
iteration. Also, it removes the need for a system-wide reference bus,
instead considers local reference bus for each area. It can support the
determination of security constrained based OPF. Recently, in Li et al.
(2018), a coordinated transmission and distribution ac optimal power
flow (TDOPF) is proposed. First, mathematical model of TDOPF is
developed and later it is solved by a master-slave distributed structure
using heterogeneous decomposition algorithm. Later, this method is
compared to multi-area OPF and improvements are reported. It helps to
mitigate the voltage rises due to load curtailment, decreases mismatch
in boundary bus, improves the economic operation allows to
accommodate more DERs by the grid.
S. Sen, V. Kumar
4.5.4. Hierarchical control
4.5.4.1. Battery management system. A hierarchical controller for power
sharing among various BESSs is proposed in Wang, Xiao, Setyawan, Jin,
and Hoong (2014). During the normal working of communication links,
centralized method of control is used which divides net power and
assigns proper power set points among BESSs depending upon SoCs. If
in case a link fails, distributed control technique gets activated, which
use dc-bus signaling (DBS) to set the power scheduling in autonomous
way. Later, this work is further extended in Xiao, Wang, and Setyawan
(2015), where in centralized layer, secondary voltage regulator is also
utilized to minimize its deviation. Hardware verification is performed
on a laboratory scale MG, where the effects of ramp rate of converters
and the time delays in data acquisition were studied. Results show it is
able to successfully take care of these contingencies.
A three layer EMS for a MG is proposed in Cominesi, Bella, Farina,
and Scattolini (2016). Devices with similar dynamics viz. the dis-
patchable and non-dispatchable sources, batteries, loads are clustered
together so that the computational burden of highest layer that defines
amount of energy exchange, is reduced. The middle supervisory layer
assigns the energy demands for units in each group. The lower layer
with built-in local controllers extracts required energy in proportion to
units’ rating. It simultaneously manages power sharing with utility,
BMS with less burden on controller and other resources. A stochastic
multi-objective MILP based optimal scheduling of BESS is discussed in
Farzin et al. (2017). It considers normal operating cost of MG along
with load curtailment index under unscheduled islanding events, while
only the probabilistic distribution of its duration is required to be
computed. These features helps to achieve a trade-off between the se-
curity and economic criteria for BESSs scheduling. Use of fuzzy decision
making approach at operator level also gives optimal performance
under grid operation.
4.5.4.2. Coordination of RES and BESSs. A unified cooperative PI
control based strategy is presented in Moradi, Eskandari, and
Hosseinian (2015) for coordinated operation of RESs and BESSs in
islanded mode of operation. Battery units are used to handle slow
response of MSs. Droop scheme at primary level for controlling the PE
converters to improve voltage regulation and load sharing. The network
is considered to be resistive and a master converter is designed as VSI,
while rest of the RESs and battery converters are working as CSI type to
achieve V-f tracking and fast dynamic response for supplying the
required power into the MG network.
4.5.4.3. Market participation. A hierarchical control based demand
response technique is proposed in Bhattarai, Bak-Jensen, Mahat,
Pillai, and Maier (2013). First a brief discussion on classification of
various demand response methods along with coordinative goals of
other actors viz. aggregator, the DSO are specified, thereafter a three
layered lower to higher progressive delays based demand response
activation time is given. This allows the control action to be liberal and
not precise as in the case of centralized demand response. However, this
framework is found to be not as accurate as its centralized counterpart.
4.5.4.4. Power quality improvement. A two-layer hierarchical control
strategy for compensating voltage harmonics of MGs by coordinating
the DERs and active filters is discussed in Savaghebi, Hashempour, and
Guerrero (2014). The primary layer consists of droop controller to share
fundamental power among DERs, a virtual impedance loop to share
required harmonic currents and PR based V-I controllers for generating
output voltage of PWM gate fired inverters. The central secondary
controller compensates voltage harmonics of sensitive load bus (SLB) by
initiating proper control signals to DERs and making the active power
filters in participating for harmonic compensation. Same authors extend
this work further to multi-MGs level in
Hashempour, Savaghebi, Vasquez, and Guerrero (2015). In both
designs simple PR were used giving fast response, however, persistent
144
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
small fluctuations were not eliminated at steady-state.
A strategy to improve reliability during utility grid faults, which
mitigates voltage sags and maintains power quality is proposed in
Zhao et al. (2015). Its two layers are: lower one consists of a primary
droop and a virtual impedance loop. The upper layer consists of two
controllers i.e. positive and negative sequence droop controllers to in-
ject both of them, to achieve proper load sharing accuracy among DERs
and mitigate voltage sags by providing ride through capability, elim-
inating negative sequence circulating current among DERs respectively.
Though voltage waveforms are free of harmonics, injecting sequence
components reduces stability of an inverters. On a similar note, in
Lorzadeh, Savaghebi, Abyaneh, and Guerrero (2015), two level control
strategy for accurate Q sharing and harmonic current among VSIs is
given. Primary level extracts different harmonic frequencies and
transmits these to secondary level. Which later, computes the respective
instantaneous circulating currents for generating control signals for
VSIs as voltage set points. Here, improved power quality is achieved
along with Q-V droop control simultaneously.
A control scheme for suppressing unbalanced voltage and harmo-
nics in grid-connected MGs is proposed in Feng, Sun, Guan, Guerrero,
and Xiao (2017). A multiple PR based voltage regulating compensator is
integrated to secondary layer to obtain references for negative funda-
mental and unbalanced harmonic voltage. The primary layer con-
stituted of PI and multiple PR controllers for tracking of VSI voltage.
Thereafter, stability analysis is performed and the magnitude of re-
duced margins is found so that parameter set point values can be ob-
tained by using the developed system model. Simple to implement,
good response for both transient and steady-state conditions are some
of its benefits.
With all these miscellaneous functions, main focus on the control
aspects of MG is completed. However, as the increasing demand for
electric transportation system, the microgrids can serve an integrated
role for aggregating the electric vehicles (EVs) into the LV distributed
system. The MGs can mostly be used to realize the charging stations
facility for the plug-in EVs. This would not only enhance the energy and
storage capacity of the MG but also, supports the balancing of excess or
less power generated power by the RESs. As this work concentrates on
MG control, the topic of EVs integration is not covered here. But, in-
terested readers can go through the article discussed in the following. In
Green, Wang, and Alam (2011), Morais, Sousa, Vale, and Faria (2014),
various impact of the EVs on the distribution network viz. vehicle pe-
netration, driving pattern, charging timing and characteristics, power
demand curve in smart grid environment etc. are discussed. This fea-
tures give rise to concepts of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) and grid-to-vehicle
(G2V). In García-Villalobos, Zamora, Martín, Asensio, and Aperribay
(2014), different smart charging control approaches are given. Model-
ling, integration, control, optimization and fleet management of these
EVs within the visions of smart grid opens up new areas for research
(Hu et al., 2016). Also, their economic and technical viability are need
to be studied. In this regard, Shafie-khah, Neyestani, Damavandi, Gil,
and Catalão (2016) presents various demand response management
techniques for market participation of MGs in presence of interacting
RESs and the integrated EVs. Similarly, in Alipour, Mohammadi-
Ivatloo, Moradi-Dalvand, and Zare (2017), stochastic optimal sche-
duling of aggregators of EVs for the energy and ancillary service market
under the uncertainties of vehicle availability, market prices and status
in reserve market are discussed.
5. Research challenges of microgrids control
As discussed earlier, despite of having huge benefits, the real world
implementation of MGs concept is not at par with its research devel-
opments over the years. Also, the existing ones are yet far from having
attributes of an ideal MG. There are various obstacles which need to be
identified and resolved. Off course these can be technical and non-
technical viz. regulatory and financial etc. As this work is meant for
S. Sen, V. Kumar
MGs control, the non-technical barriers are not discussed here. The
interested readers can find more on this topic in
Soshinskaya, Graus, Guerrero, and Vasquez (2014). Here, it is im-
portant to recognize that there are some existing microgrid testbeds
around the world as discussed in Hossain et al. (2014), Lidula and
Rajapakse (2011) Ustun, Ozansoy, and Zayegh (2011). The CERTS
testbed in Ohio, USA is the one of the most researched MGs around the
world. It uses a peer-to-peer i.e. the decentralized control strategy using
P-f and Q-V droop with resynchronization features. Another popular
MG system is available at National Technical University of Athens
(NTUA), Greece where MAS based control technique is implemented
using four agents viz. production unit, consumption unit, power system
and MGCC. A demonstrative project at Aichi, Japan is maintained by
the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization
(NEDO) is used to reduce demand-supply gap with consideration of
day-ahead planning with GA and a meta-heuristic search technique.
From these discussion, it can be said that, real scale uses of MGs is still
in experimental stage and several outstanding technical issues are
needed to be resolved (Hirscha, Parag and Guerrero, 2018). This section
briefly discusses various research gaps, technical challenges existing in
present MG control literature, resolving which would lead to more real
scale implementation.
The technical obstacles are identified under the perspectives of
global and local/component level for the MGs.
1. Global/whole MG level issues:
• Islanding detection and initiation: is the most important feature of
MGs, islanding detection within minimum time of a utility fault
and initiating various adjustments at each component (RESs,
loads, PE converters) level, such that the reliability of MG system
is maintained.
• Resynchronization with upstream network: after having the fault
clearance, exact moment of reclosing the switch/CB at PCC, calls
for a substantial amount of control functions i.e. regulate V-f and
minimizing the load and generation power mismatch.
• Maintaining power quality: due to use of fluctuating RESs the DSO
during grid-tied has to maintain nominal V-f and P-Q balance,
which is difficult because of coupling nature of P-Q due to high R/
X ratio of LV network.
• Coordinated control of harmonics: extensive presence of PE con-
verters causes high risk of circulating current and local over-
voltage at DERs ends. Proper techniques are needed to be devel-
oped to dealt with these problems.
• Protection from internal faults: during external/main grid faults,
MGs’ islanding is a solution. But, for internal faults, the inverter
based MSs doesn't generate the rated amount of fault currents
required for detection and tripping of the conventional over-
current relays.
• Planning of new MGs: while building a MG at a remote location the
planning plays an important role. Proximity of ac and dc MSs and
loads should be carefully planned to have an optimal design with
least power losses.
2. Component level/distributed issues:
• High maintenance components: fuel cell, lead-acid battery systems
etc. calls for regular maintenance. Some personnel have to be
deployed for the purpose.
• Minimizing generation fluctuations: weather dependence of RESs
always creates major problems in managing the demand-supply
balance. Usage of storage devices with the adjustable maximum
power point tracking (MPPT) would play a supporting role.
• Communication between agents: multi-agent based control archi-
tecture requires regular contact and proper negotiation algorithms
for a coordinated operation, are often difficult to be implement for
prolific components of MGs.
• Unbalanced grid conditions: working of DERs to maintain power
quality during the unbalanced conditions with un-symmetric V-I
145
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
sequence are required to be studied. Proper control scheme for
oscillation free active power and ripple free voltage need to be
developed.
• Plug-and-play (PnP) capabilities: connecting MSs and other per-
ipherals without disturbing the MGs’ operational stability is not
an easy task to be realized, it's limited by reconfigure require-
ments for real time synchronization.
• Load shedding algorithms: to provide reliable supply for critical
loads, managing demands during the peak hours, needs a con-
solidated design and implementation of load shedding algorithm
for interruptible and shiftable loads.
Various research gaps and challenges for MG control are suggested
in the earlier discussed four control architectures.
1. Centralized control:
• Optimal demand response: design of MGCC for achieving proper
demand side management (DSM) under various fluctuating
quantities/variables i.e. generation, grid price, status of MSs and
loads, LCs’ parameters etc.
• Multiple interlinking converters: a master/slave centralized archi-
tecture for P-Q exchange and V-f regulation for power quality
improvement along with fault current limiters in a multi-MGs
scenario is need to be developed.
• Market participation: reduced operational cost could be achieved
by including market prices, supply and demand bids along with
short term load-generation forecasting into the EMS algorithms
while dealing with the upstream DSO for providing ancillary
services.
• Robust decision making: use of fuzzy logic, MPC and IMC instead of
existing classical multiple control loops are open for research and
a performance assessment for identifying best suited for uncertain
MG systems.
• Protection functions of MGCC: can accommodate various adaptive
relay functions, differential schemes, variability of DERs, power
rate limits, dual-mode operation etc. needs more exposition.
2. Decentralized control:
• Detailed documentation of droop variants: a comparative study and
performance assessment of various droop control types to find the
best suitable for real scale application on the LV MG networks.
• Cost-prioritized nonlinear droop: to simultaneously attain optimal
and fast transient response at primary layer, a cost- based objec-
tive function with nonlinear droop coefficient updation is re-
quired to be developed.
• Power line or dc-bus signaling: certain amount of global coordina-
tion can be achieved by DBS communication by inducing voltage
level changes at control nodes by the LCs for each device. This
area needs a thorough research.
• System inertia: as inverter based MGs lacks inertial traits of con-
ventional power system, each controller designed for PEI of DERs
should generate certain magnitude of virtual inertia to keep nor-
malcy of MG frequency.
3. Distributed control:
• Stability of overall system: though this enhances reliability and
redundancy in comparison to centralized scheme, more under-
standing on their effects on convergence and stability of the
overall MG system is need to be studied.
• Model-free based algorithms: control strategies which are in-
dependent of detailed MG model and robust to changes in system
parameters are required to be developed to suit the inherently
uncertain MG operating scenario.
• Interaction of multi-agents in multi-MG system: networked MGs with
interlinking agents/controllers are required to be analyzed for
negotiating amount of power sharing between themselves, while
maintaining proper P-Q level within.
• Cybersecurity considerations: developing robust control schemes to
S. Sen, V. Kumar
prevent cyber-attacks on communication links requires more at-
tention.
• Pinning control: with advantages of being computationally efficient
and smaller number of controller/agents usage than conventional
MAS, more emphasis is need to be given on its application.
4. Hierarchical control:
• Unified control scheme for mode switching: smooth mode transition
i.e. islanding and resynchronization of MG needs assistance from a
single circuit configuration with unified design to be able to in-
stantaneously shift its role to and fro the islanded and grid-con-
nected operation.
• Closed loop designs: most hierarchical structure are open loop de-
sign: primary-secondary-tertiary, while for better optimization
and efficient operation, feedback signals from upper to lower
layer are required for set points selection.
• Cooperative power quality control: the inclusion of EVs in MGs
systems the huge charging current leads to deteriorate power
quality, need for integrated control for improving voltage fluc-
tuation and harmonics compensation.
• Modern control techniques: classical PI control is the most exploited
one, while multi-layer optimal, MPC are not yet been explored. A
detailed research on implementation of these on MGs hierarchical
functions is open for research.
• Outage management scheme: to maintain high reliability, especially
for critical loads and coordination between rest of the loads, a
proper OMS is an absolute requirement.
6. Role of microgrids in realizing smart grid
This section presents the role of MGs for realizing smart grid tech-
nologies. It briefly discusses several basic integrated technologies and
brings various future trends of MGs concepts to fulfill the requirements
of a smart grid. It can be defined as electric power system where all the
functions viz. generation, delivery (transmission and distribution),
storage and end usage are all automated and cyber enabled
(Annaswamy, 2013). The important concepts of system modeling and
identification, state estimation, optimization, adaptive and feedback
control etc. will be key enablers. This electricity infrastructure would
have the following traits:
• Integrates intermittent RESs to achieve decarbonization;
• Facilitate two-way exchange of power and information;
• Optimized resource/asset utilization;
• Provides reliable power efficiently, with flexible demand manage-
ment and customer choices;
• Possess self-healing capabilities from any disturbance event in the
network;
• Be resilient to physical and cyber-attacks.
The power system is always been considered to be “smart” at the
transmission level. After the deregulated restructuring, distribution
network is presently evolving and with inception of MGs concepts it is
becoming more smart. Some of the devices for smart grid functions are
given in Yoldas, Onen, Muyeen, Vasilakos, and Alan (2017). Further
contributions towards it could be availed by integrating the following
into MG technologies:
1. Communication infrastructure:
• Power line carrier communication (PLCC): uses existing distribution
lines, hence provides a low cost information exchange medium for
transmitting the modulated signals at radio frequency between
10 kHz to 490 kHz.
• Digital subscriber lines (DSL): another low cost option for high
speed communication is by using existing, widespread telephone
line infrastructure.
• Optical ground wire (OPGW): with low latency, immunity to
146
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
interference and high data transfer rate, optical fibers are con-
sidered most reliable medium.
2. Measurement/Monitoring infrastructure:
• Smart metering infrastructure (SMI): it facilitates two-way com-
munication, records electricity usage at hourly interval and sends
the data to the utility grid central management system for mon-
itoring and billing. It also receives the information on unit elec-
tricity price at each hour, so that, customer may adjust its con-
sumption.
• Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system: works on
a wide area and supports the DSOs in decision making. Facilitates
data acquisition from important buses, supervisory control and
activates alarms during critical operating scenarios. Coordinates
between EMS and RTUs.
• Phasor measurement units (PMU): though costly, but most efficient
technology for the wide-area measurement system (WAMS),
readily provides the voltage, current magnitudes and phase angles
with precise time synchronization. Must be implemented for
multi-MGs optimization and control.
• Advanced forecasting techniques: load demand, generation and
electricity price forecasting plays a crucial role in MG concepts. It
provides statistics based pseudo measurement, for deciding stra-
tegies for next 24/48 hours. It would also accommodate various
RESs and load uncertainties.
3. Control infrastructure:
• Remote terminal units (RTU): can act as local controllers (LCs) at
each component of a MG. These micro-controllers based special
purpose computers receives set points/status as digital input and
generates digital control output.
• Distributed control system (DCS): due to distributed nature of var-
ious entities in a MG, a complete distributed control infrastructure
is inevitable. It achieves global optimization, reconfigure the LCs
and facilitates PnP capabilities.
• Energy management system (EMS): central unit to manage MG and
utility grid interaction, maintain demand-supply balance and
provide redundant backup for all the devices. It optimizes the MG
operation with ED and UC.
• Vehicle to grid (V2G) technology: could facilitate spinning reserve,
load balancing, improve efficiency and reliability by charging/
discharging of EVs as per need.
4. Protection infrastructure:
• Protective (directional over current) relays: these smart, remotely
reconfigurable, minimum time relays are primary requirements
for fault isolation, equipment protection and preserving MGs’
stability. These should be able to handle the bidirectional fault
current.
• Programmable logic controller (PLC): real time extended input/
output (I/O) functions of various relays and control architecture
asks for use of PLCs. It incorporates adaptive, intelligent and
backup features into MGs technologies.
• Static transfer switch (STS): enhances reliability of critical loads by
allowing instantaneous transfer of power source, also provides
ride-through capability during short duration power disturbances.
• Islanding detection methods (IDM): essential requirement for
maintain reliability and stability of MG system during utility grid
faults, by getting separated within time at PCC. Several methods
are still under research.
7. Conclusions
MGs, a cluster of various electrical and electronic devices, are re-
garded as the best possible way to realize the smart grid features. This
work compiles various control aspects of MGs viz. its functional re-
quirements, architectures, level structuring, classification. Due to its
inherent SoSs perspective, the control structures are implemented
under these four heads: centralized, decentralized, distributed and
S. Sen, V. Kumar
hierarchical. A comprehensive survey of MGs’ droop control, V-f reg-
ulation, P-Q sharing, EMS are documented. Here, an extensive list of
references was compiled. Several miscellaneous applications i.e. BMS,
power quality improvement, coordinated parallel operation of RESs and
BESSs etc. are also reported. Thereafter, several technical barriers/ob-
stacles which prevent real scale usage of MGs were identified and other
research gaps on MG control functions are suggested for SG researchers.
Finally, the role of MG and other integrated technological improve-
ments required for realizing future SG were briefly summarized. The
budding researchers in SG field would acknowledge this paper for
bringing different control aspects on MGs under one cover.
References
Abdelaziz, M., Shaaban, M., Farag, H., & El-Saadany, E. (2014). A multistage cen-
tralized control scheme for islanded microgrids with PEVs. IEEE Transactions on
Sustainable Energy, 5 (3), 927– 937.
Ahmadi, S., Nazarpour, D., Shafiee, Q., & Bevrani, H. (2016). A fuzzy inference model
for distributed secondary control of islanded microgrids. Proceedings of the twenty
fourth Iranian conference on electrical engineering (pp. 1233–1238). .
Ahn, C., & Peng, H. (2013). Decentralized voltage control to minimize distribution
power loss of microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 4 (3), 1297– 1304.
Akbari, M., Golkar, M. A., & Tafreshi, S. M. M. (2011). Voltage control of a hybrid ac/dc
microgrid in grid-connected operation mode. IEEE Proceedings of the PES innovative
smart grid technologies (pp. 358–362). .
Alipour, M., Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B., Moradi-Dalvand, M., & Zare, K. (2017). Stochastic
scheduling of aggregators of plug-in electric vehicles for participation in energy and
ancillary service markets. Energy, 118, 1168– 1179.
Almada, J. B., Leao, R. P., Ampaio, R. F., & Barroso, G. C. (2016). A centralized and
heuristic approach for energy management of an ac microgrid. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 60, 1396– 1404.
Ambia, M., Al-Durra, A., Caruana, C., & Muyeen, S. (2014). Power management of
hybrid micro-grid system by a generic centralized supervisory control scheme.
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 8, 57– 65.
Anand, S., Fernandes, B., & Guerrero, J. (2013). Distributed control to ensure pro-
portional load sharing and improve voltage regulation in low-voltage dc Microgrids.
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 28 (4), 1900– 1913.
Annaswamy, A. M (Ed.). (2013). IEEE vision for smart grid controls: 2030 and beyond IEEE
Press Publications .
Asad, R., & Kazemi, A. (2014). A novel distributed optimal power sharing method for
radial dc microgrids with different distributed energy sources. Energy, 72, 291– 299.
Avila, N. F., & Chu, C. (2016). Distributed pinning droop control in isolated ac micro-
grids. Proceedings of the American control conference IEEE industry applications society
annual meeting (pp. 1–8). .
Azevedo, R., Cintuglu, M. H., Ma, T., & Mohammed, O. A. (2017). Multiagent-based
optimal microgrid control using fully distributed diffusion strategy. IEEE Transactions
on Smart Grid, 8 (4), 1997– 2008.
Baghaee, H. R., Mirsalim, M., & Gharehpetian, G. B. (2016). Power calculation using
RBF neural networks to improve power sharing of hierarchical control scheme in
multi-der microgrids. IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in PE, 4 (4), 1217–
1225.
Baghaee, H. R., Mirsalim, M., Gharehpetian, G. B., & Talebi, H. A. (2017). A decen-
tralized power management and sliding mode control strategy for hybrid ac/dc mi-
crogrids including renewable energy resources. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Informatics In press.
Bahramara, S., Moghaddam, M. P., & Haghifam, M. R. (2016). A bi-level optimization
model for operation of distribution networks with micro-grids. Electrical Power and
Energy Systems, 82, 169– 178.
Bella, A. L., Cominesi, S. R., Sandroni, C., & Scattolini, R. (2017). Hierarchical pre-
dictive control of microgrids in islanded operation. IEEE Transactions on Automation
Science and Engineering, 14 (2), 536– 546.
Berkel, F., Görges, D., & Liu, S. (2013). Load-frequency control, economic dispatch and
unit commitment in smart microgrids based on hierarchical MPC. Proceedings of the
IEEE conference on decision and control (pp. 2326–2333). .
Bersani, C., Dagdougui, H., Ouammi, A., & Sacile, R. (2017). Distributed robust control
of the power flows in a team of cooperating microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Control
Systems Technology, 25 (4), 1473– 1479.
Bhattacharya, S., & Mishra, S. (2016). Coordinated decentralized control for PV-EV
based grid connected microgrids. Proceedings of the sixth IEEE international conference
on power systems (pp. 1–6). .
Bhattarai, B. P., Bak-Jensen, B., Mahat, P., Pillai, J. R., & Maier, M. (2013).
Hierarchical control architecture for demand response in smart grids. Proceedings of
the IEEE PES Asia-pacific power and energy engineering conference (pp. 1–6). .
Bidram, A., & Davoudi, A. (2012). Hierarchical structure of microgrids control system.
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 3 (4), 1963– 1976.
Bidram, A., Davoudi, A., Lewis, F. L., & Guerrero, J. M. (2013a). Distributed co-
operative secondary control of microgrids using feedback linearization. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 28 (3), 3462– 3470.
Bidram, A., Davoudi, A., Lewis, F. L., & Ge, S. S. (2014a). Distributed adaptive voltage
control of inverter-based microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 29 (4),
862– 872.
147
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Bidram, A., Davoudi, A., & Lewis, F. L. (2014b). A multi-objective distributed control
framework for islanded ac microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 10
(3), 1785– 1798.
Bolognani, S., & Zampieri, S. (2011). Distributed control for optimal reactive power
compensation in smart microgrids. Proceedings of the fiftieth IEEE conference on de-
cision and control and European control conference (pp. 6630–6635). .
Bolognani, S., & Zampieri, S. (2013). A distributed control strategy for reactive power
compensation in smart microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 58 (11),
2818– 2833.
Bracco, S., Delfino, F., Pampararo, F., Robba, M., & Rossi, M. (2015). A dynamic
optimization-based architecture for polygeneration microgrids with tri-generation,
renewables, storage systems and electrical vehicles. Energy Conversion and
Management, 96, 511– 520.
Brandao, D., Caldognetto, T., Marafao, F., Simoes, M., Pomilio, J., & Tenti, P. (2017).
Centralized control of distributed single-phase inverters arbitrarily connected to
three-phase four-wire microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 8 (1), 437– 446.
Cady, S. T., Domínguez-García, A. D., & Hadjicostis, C. N. (2015a). A distributed
generation control architecture for islanded ac microgrids. IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology, 23 (5), 1717– 1735.
Cai, H., & Hu, G. (2018). Distributed robust hierarchical power sharing control of grid-
connected spatially concentrated ac microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems
Technology In press.
Cai, N., & Mitra, J. (2014). A multi-level control architecture for master-slave organized
microgrids with power electronic interfaces. Electric Power Systems Research, 109,
8– 19.
Cai, H., Hu, G., Lewis, F. L., & Davoudi, A. (2016). A distributed feedforward approach
to cooperative control of ac microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 31 (5),
4057– 4067.
Caldognetto, T., Tenti, P., Mattavelli, P., Buso, S., & Brandao, D. I. (2015). Cooperative
compensation of unwanted current terms in low-voltage microgrids by distributed
power-based control. Proceedings of the IEEE thirteenth Brazilian PE conference and first
southern PE conference (pp. 1–7). .
Canizares, C. A. (2014). Trends in Microgrid Control. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 5
(4), 1905– 1919.
Cavraro, G., Caldognetto, T., Carli, R., & Tenti, P. (2016). A master/slave control of
distributed energy resources in low-voltage microgrids. Proceedings of the European
control conference (pp. 1507–1512). .
Chamorro, H. R., & Díaz, N. L. (2013). Hierarchical power flow control in low voltage
microgrids. Proceedings of the North American power symposium (pp. 1–5). .
Chang, C., & Zhang, W. (2015). On distributed control of voltage source inverters in
island ac microgrids. Proceedings of the American control conference (pp. 2365–
2370). .
Chang, C. Y., & Zhang, W. (2016). Distributed control of inverter-based lossy microgrids
for power sharing and frequency regulation under voltage constraints. Automatica,
66, 85– 95.
Che, L., & Shahidehpour, M. (2014). DC microgrids: Economic operation and en-
hancement of resilience by hierarchical control. IEEE Transaction on Smart Grid, 5
(5), 2517– 2526.
Chen, G., & Feng, E. (2015). Distributed secondary control and optimal power sharing in
microgrids. IEEE/CAA J. of Automatica Sinica, 2 (3), 304– 312.
Chen, F., Burgos, R., Boroyevich, D., Rodriguez-Diaz, E., Meng, L., Vasquez, J. C., et al.
(2016). Analysis and distributed control of power flow in dc microgrids to improve
system efficiency. Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on environmental
friendly energies and applications (pp. 1–6). .
Chen, X., Hou, Y., & Hui, S. Y. (2017). Distributed control of multiple electric springs for
voltage control in microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 8 (3), 1350– 1359.
Cominesi, S. R., Bella, A., Farina, M., & Scattolini, R. (2016). A multi-layer control
scheme for microgrid energy management. IFAC Conference, 49 (27), 256– 261.
Cominesi, S. R., Farina, M., Giulioni, L., Picasso, B., & Scattolini, R. (2018). A two-layer
stochastic model predictive control scheme for microgrids. IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology, 26 (1), 1– 13.
Cook, M. D., Parker, G. G., Robinett, R. D., & Weaver, W. W. (2017). Decentralized
mode-adaptive guidance and control for DC microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, 32 (1), 263– 271.
Costabeber, A., Tenti, P., Erseghe, T., Tomasin, S., & Mattavelli, P. (2011). Distributed
control of smart microgrids by dynamic grid mapping. Proceedings of the thirty seventh
annual conference of the IEEE industrial electronics society (pp. 1323–1328). .
Cucuzzella, M., Incremona, G. P., & Ferrara, A. (2017). Decentralized sliding mode
control of islanded ac microgrids with arbitrary topology. IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, 64 (8), 6706– 6713.
Deckmyn, C., Vandoorn, T. L., Vyver, J., Desmet, J., & Vandevelde, L. (2017). A
microgrid multilayer control concept for optimal power scheduling and voltage
control. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.
Dehkordi, N. M., Sadati, N., & Hamzeh, M. (2017). Distributed robust finite-time sec-
ondary voltage and frequency control of islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems In press.
Deng, N., Zhang, X. P., Wang, P., Gu, X., & Wu, M. (2013). A converter-based general
interface for ac microgrid integrating to the grid. Proceedings of the fourth IEEE PES
innovative smart grid technologies (pp. 1–5). .
Diaz, N. L., Luna, A. C., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M. (2017a). Centralized control
architecture for coordination of distributed renewable generation and energy storage
in islanded ac microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 32 (7), 5202–
5213.
Diaz, N. L., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M. (2018). A communication less distributed
control architecture for islanded microgrids with renewable generation and storage.
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 33 (3), 1922– 1939.
S. Sen, V. Kumar
Ding, M., Zhang, Y. Y., Mao, M. Q., Yang, W., & Liu, X. P. (2010). Operation opti-
mization for microgrids under centralized control. Proceedings of the second interna-
tional symposium on power electronics for distributed generation systems (pp. 984–987). .
Ding, M., Ma, K., Bi, R., Mao, M., & Chang, L. (2013). A hierarchical control scheme
based on multi-agent system for islanded multi-microgrids. Proceedings of the fourth
IEEE international symposium on power electronics for distributed generation systems (pp.
1–5). .
Divshali, P., Alimardani, A., Hosseinian, S., & Abedi, M. (2012). Decentralized co-
operative control strategy of microsources for stabilizing autonomous VSC-based
microgrids. IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, 27 (4), 1949– 1959.
Dorfler, F., Simpson-Porco, J. W., & Bullo, F. (2016). Breaking the hierarchy: Distributed
control and economic optimality in microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Control of
Network Systems, 3 (3), 241– 253.
Dragicevic, T., Lu, X., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M. (2016). DC microgrids -Part I: A
review of control strategies and stabilization techniques. IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, 31 (7), 4876– 4891.
Duan, J., Wang, C., Xu, H., Liu, W., Peng, J., & Jiang, H. (2018). Distributed control of
inverter-interfaced microgrids with bounded transient line currents. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics In press.
Eid, B. M., Rahim, N. A., Selvaraj, J., & Khateb, A. (2016). “Control methods and
objectives for electronically coupled distributed energy resources in microgrids: A
review. IEEE Systems Journal, 10 (2), 446– 458.
El-Taweel, N., & Farag, H. (2017). Voltage regulation in islanded microgrids using
distributed constraint satisfaction. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.
Engels, J., Almasalma, H., & Deconinck, G. (2016). A distributed gossip-based voltage
control algorithm for peer-to-peer microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE international
conference on smart grid communications (pp. 370–375). .
Etemadi, A. H., Davison, E. J., & Iravani, R. (2014). A generalized decentralized robust
control of islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 29 (6), 3102–
3113.
Fan, Y., Hu, G., & Egerstedt, M. (2017). Distributed reactive power sharing control for
microgrids with event-triggered communication. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems
Technology, 25 (1), 118– 128.
Farzin, H., Firuzabad, M., & Moeini-Aghtaie, M. (2016). Enhancing power system re-
silience through hierarchical outage management in multi-microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, 7 (6), 2869– 2879.
Farzin, H., Firuzabad, M., & Moeini-Aghtaie, M. (2017a). Stochastic energy manage-
ment of microgrids during unscheduled islanding period. IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Informatics, 13 (3), 1079– 1087.
Farzin, H., Firuzabad, M., & Moeini-Aghtaie, M. (2017b). A stochastic multi-objective
framework for optimal scheduling of energy storage systems in microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, 8 (1), 117– 127.
Feng, W., Sun, K., Guan, Y., Guerrero, J. M., & Xiao, X. (2017). Active power quality
improvement strategy for grid-connected microgrid based on hierarchical control.
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.
García-Villalobos, J., Zamora, I., Martín, J. I., Asensio, F. J., & Aperribay, V. (2014).
Plug-in electric vehicles in electric distribution networks: A review of smart charging
approaches. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 38, 717– 731.
Gavriluta, C., Candela, J. I., Citro, C., Rocabert, J., Luna, A., & Rodríguez, P. (2014).
Decentralized primary control of MTDC networks with energy storage and distributed
generation. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, 50 (6), 4122– 4131.
Gil, N., & Lopes, J. (2007). Hierarchical frequency control scheme for islanded multi-
microgrids operation. Proceedings of the IEEE Lausanne power tech (pp. 473–478). .
Gkavanoudis, S. I., Oureilidis, K. O., & Demoulias, C. S. (2016). An adaptive droop
control method for balancing the SoC of distributed batteries in AC microgrids.
Proceedings of the IEEE seventeenth workshop on control and modeling for power elec-
tronics (pp. 1–6). .
Golsorkhi, M. S., & Lu, D. D. C. (2014). A decentralized power flow control method for
islanded microgrids using V-I droop. Proceedings of the twenty second Iranian con-
ference on electrical engineering (pp. 604–609). .
Golsorkhi, M. S., & Lu, D. (2015). A control method for inverter-based islanded mi-
crogrids based on V-I droop characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 30
(3), 1196– 1204.
Golsorkhi, M. S., & Lu, D. (2016). A decentralized control method for islanded micro-
grids under unbalanced conditions. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 31 (3),
1112– 1121.
Golsorkhi, M. S., Lu, D. D. C., Savaghebi, M., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M. (2016). A
GPS-based control method for load sharing and power quality improvement in mi-
crogrids. Proceedings of the IEEE eighth international power electronics and motion
control conference (pp. 3734–3740). .
Golsorkhi, M. S., Lu, D., & Guerrero, J. M. (2017a). A GPS-based decentralized control
method for islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 32 (2),
1615– 1625.
Green, R. C. , II, Wang, L., & Alam, M. (2011). The impact of plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles on distribution networks: A review and outlook. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 15, 544– 553.
Gu, W., Lou, G., Tan, W., & Yuan, X. (2017). A nonlinear state estimator-based de-
centralized secondary voltage control scheme for autonomous microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 32 (6), 4794– 4804.
Guerrero, J. M., Matas, J., Vicuna, L. G., Castilla, M., & Miret, J. (2007). Decentralized
control for parallel operation of distributed generation inverters in microgrids using
resistive output impedance. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 54 (2), 994–
1004.
Guerrero, J. M., Chandorkar, M., Lee, T., & Loh, P. C. (2013). Advanced control ar-
chitectures for intelligent microgrids—Part I: Decentralized and hierarchical control.
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 60 (4), 1254– 1262.
148
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Guo, F., Wen, C., Mao, J., & Song, Y. D. (2015). Distributed secondary voltage and
frequency restoration control of droop-controlled inverter-based microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 62 (7), 4355– 4364.
Hajar, K., Hably, A., Bacha, S., Elrafhi, A., & Obeid, Z. (2016a). Optimal centralized
control application on microgrids. Proceedings of the third IEEE international con-
ference on renewable energies for developing countries (pp. 1–6). .
Hamidia, R. J., Livania, H., Hosseinianb, S. H., & Gharehpetian, G. B. (2015).
Distributed cooperative control system for smart microgrids. Electric Power Systems
Research, 130, 241– 250.
Han, H., Hou, X., Yang, J., Wu, J., Su, M., & Guerrero, J. M. (2016a). Review of power
sharing control strategies for islanding operation of ac microgrids. IEEE Transactions
on Smart Grid, 7 (1), 200– 215.
Hashempour, M., Savaghebi, M., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M. (2015). Hierarchical
control for voltage harmonics compensation in multi-area microgrids. Proceedings of
the IEEE tenth international symposium on diagnostics for electrical machines, power
electronics and drives (pp. 415–420). .
Hatziargyriou, N. (2014). Microgrid: architecture and control. Wiley & Sons Publications,
IEEE Press ISBN: 9781118720684.
He, J., Li, Y., Liang, B., & Wang, C. (2017). Inverse power factor droop control for
decentralized power sharing in series-connected micro-converters based islanding
microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 64 (9), 7444– 7454.
Hirscha, A., Parag, Y., & Guerrero, J. M. (2018). Microgrids: A review of technologies,
key drivers, and outstanding issues. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 90,
402– 411.
Hossain, M. J., Lu, J., Mahmud, M. A., & Aziz, T. (2014a). Advanced decentralized DER
control for islanded microgrids. Proceedings of the Australasian Universities power
engineering conference (pp. 1–5). .
Hossain, M. J., Mahmud, M. A., Milano, F., Bacha, S., & Hably, A. (2016). Design of
robust distributed control for interconnected microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, 7 (6), 2724– 2735.
Hosseinimehr, T., Ghosh, A., & Shahnia, F. (2016). Cooperative control of battery en-
ergy storage systems in microgrids. Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 87, 109–
120.
Hu, X., Zhou, H., Liu, Z. W., Guan, Z. H., & Chi, M. (2016a). Reactive power com-
pensation in microgrids via distributed control strategy. Proceedings of the twelfth
world congress on intelligent control and automation (pp. 1635–1640). .
Huang, P., Liu, P., Xiao, W., & Moursi, M. S. (2015). A novel droop-based average
voltage sharing control strategy for dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 6
(3), 1096– 1106.
Iggland, E., Wiget, R., Chatzivasileiadis, S., & Anderson, G. (2015). Multi-area DC-OPF
for HVAC and HVDC grids. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 30 (5), 2450– 2459.
Jana, K., Ray, A., Majoumerd, M. M., Assadi, M., & De, S. (2017). Polygeneration as a
future sustainable energy solution – a comprehensive review. Applied Energy, 201,
88– 111.
Jin, C., Wang, P., Xiao, J., Tang, Y., & Choo, F. H. (2014). Implementation of hier-
archical control in dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 61 (8),
4032– 4042.
Kammer, C., & Karimi, A. (2016). Robust distributed averaging frequency control of
inverter-based microgrids. Proceedings of the fifty fifth IEEE conference on decision and
control (pp. 4973–4978). .
Karami, M., Seifi, H., & Mohammadian, M. (2016). Seamless control scheme for dis-
tributed energy resources in microgrids. IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution,
10 (11), 2756– 2763.
Karavas, C. S., Kyriakarakos, G., Arvanitis, K. G., & Papadaki, G. (2015a). A multi-agent
decentralized energy management system based on distributed intelligence for the
design and control of autonomous polygeneration microgrids. Energy Conversion and
Management, 103, 166– 179.
Karimi, M., Wall, P., Mokhlis, H., & Terzija, V. (2017a). A new centralized adaptive
underfrequency load shedding controller for microgrids based on a distribution state
estimator. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 32 (1), 370– 380.
Karimi, Y., Oraee, H., Golsorkhi, M. S., & Guerrero, J. (2017b). Decentralized method
for load sharing and power management in a PV/battery hybrid source islanded
microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 32 (5), 3525– 3535.
Katiraei, F., Iravani, M. R., & Lehn, P. W. (2005). Microgrid autonomous operation
during and subsequent to islanding process. IEEE Transaction on Power Delivery, 20
(1), 248– 257.
Kaur, A., Kaushal, J., & Basak, P. (2015). A review on microgrid central controller.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 55, 338– 345.
Khooban, M. H., Niknam, T., Shasadeghi, M., Dragicevic, T., & Blaabjerg, F. (2018).
Load frequency control in microgrids based on a stochastic noninteger controller.
IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 9 (2), 853– 861.
Khorsandi, A., Ashourloo, M., & Mokhtari, H. (2014). A decentralized control method
for a low-voltage dc microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 29 (4), 793–
801.
Kou, P., Liang, D., & Gao, L. (2016). Distributed EMPC of multiple MGs for coordinated
stochastic energy management. Applied Energy, 185, 939– 952.
Kou, P., Liang, D., & Gao, L. (2017). Distributed coordination of multiple PMSGs in an
islanded dc microgrid for load sharing. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 32
(2), 471– 485.
Kyriakarakos, G., Piromalis, D. D., Dounis, A. I., Arvanitis, K. G., & Papadakis, G.
(2013). Intelligent demand side energy management system for autonomous poly-
generation microgrids. Applied Energy, 103, 39– 51.
Lai, J., Zhou, H., Lu, X., Yu, X., & Hu, W. (2016a). Droop-based distributed cooperative
control for microgrids with time-varying delays. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 7
(4), 1775– 1789.
Systems & control for the future of humanity, research agenda: Current and future roles,
S. Sen, V. Kumar
impact and grand challenges. F. Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue (Ed.). Systems & control for
the future of humanity, research agenda: Current and future roles, impact and grand
challenges, Annual Reviews in Control, 43, 1– 64.
Lee, Z., Zhu, S., Zheng, J., Choi, D. H., & Wei, L. (2014). Research on dynamic process
of dc microgrid under hierarchical control. Proceedings of the nineteenth world congress
the international federation of automatic control (pp. 4560–4564). .
Li, C., Dragicevic, T., Plaza, M., Andrade, F., Vasquez, J., & Guerrero, J. (2014).
Multiagent based distributed control for state-of-charge balance of distributed energy
storage in dc microgrids. Proceedings of the fortieth annual conference of the IEEE in-
dustrial electronics society (pp. 2180–2184). .
Li, Y., Liu, N., & Zhang, J. (2015). Jointly optimization and distributed control for
interconnected operation of autonomous microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE in-
novative smart grid technologies (pp. 1–6). .
Li, Q., Chen, F., Chen, M., Guerrero, J. M., & Abbott, D. (2016a). Agent-based de-
centralized control method for islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid,
7 (2), 637– 649.
Li, Q., Peng, C., Chen, M., Chen, F., Kang, W., Guerrero, J., et al. (2017a). Networked
and distributed control method with optimal power dispatch for islanded microgrids.
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 64 (1), 493– 504.
Li, Q., Peng, C., Wang, M., Chen, M., Guerrero, J. M., & Abbott, D. (2018a). Distributed
secondary control and management of islanded microgrids via dynamic weights.
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.
Lidula, N. W. A., & Rajapakse, A. D. (2011). Microgrids research: A review of experi-
mental microgrids and test systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15,
186– 202.
Lin, P., Jin, C., Xiao, J., Li, X., Shi, D., Tang, Y., et al. (2018). A Distributed control
architecture for global system economic operation in autonomous hybrid ac/dc mi-
crogrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.
Liu, W., Gu, W., Sheng, W., Meng, X., Wu, Z., & Chen, W. (2014). Decentralized multi-
agent system-based cooperative frequency control for autonomous microgrids with
communication constraints. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 5 (2), 446–
456.
Liu, W., Gu, W., Xu, Y., Xue, S., Chen, M., Zhao, B., et al. (2015). Improved average
consensus algorithm based distributed cost optimization for loading shedding of
autonomous microgrids. Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 73, 89– 96.
Liu, W., Gu, W., Sheng, W., Meng, X., Xue, S., & Chen, M. (2016). Pinning-based
distributed cooperative control for autonomous microgrids under uncertain com-
munication topologies. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 31 (2), 1320– 1329.
Lizhen, W., Xiaohong, H., Zhengzhe, L., Zuohao, L., & Hu, Z. (2016). Decentralized
control approach for voltage unbalance compensation in islanded microgrid.
Proceedings of the IEEE eighth international power electronics and motion control con-
ference (pp. 1776–1781). .
Lorzadeh, I., Savaghebi, M., Abyaneh, H., & Guerrero, J. (2015). A hierarchical control
scheme for reactive power and harmonic current sharing in islanded microgrids.
Proceedings of the seventeenth European conference on power electronics and applications
(pp. 1–10). .
Lou, G., Gu, W., Xu, Y., Cheng, M., & Liu, W. (2017). Distributed MPC-based secondary
voltage control scheme for autonomous droop-controlled microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 8 (2), 792– 804.
Lu, X., Guerrero, J. M., Sun, K., Vasquez, J. C., Teodorescu, R., & Huang, L. (2014).
Hierarchical control of parallel ac-dc converter interfaces for hybrid microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, 5 (2), 683– 692.
Lu, L., Liu, H. J., & Zhu, H. (2016a). Distributed secondary control for isolated mi-
crogrids under malicious attacks. Proceedings of the North American power symposium
(pp. 1–6). .
Lu, X., Yu, X., Lai, J., Guerrero, J. M., & Zhou, H. (2017a). Distributed secondary
voltage and frequency control for islanded microgrids with uncertain communication
links. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 13 (2), 448– 460.
Lu, T., Wang, Z., Ai, Q., & Lee, W. J. (2017b). Interactive model for energy management
of clustered microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, 53 (3), 1739–
1750.
Luo, F., Lai, Y. M., Loo, K. H., Tse, C. K., & Ruan, X. (2013). A generalized droop-
control scheme for decentralized control of inverter-interfaced microgrids.
Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on circuits and systems (pp. 1320–
1323). .
Lv, T., Ai, Q., & Zhao, Y. (2015). A bi-level multi-objective optimal operation of grid-
connected microgrids. Electric Power System Research, 131, 60– 70.
Ma, J., Yuan, L., Zhao, Z., & He, F. (2017). Transmission loss optimization-based
optimal power flow strategy by hierarchical control for dc microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, 32 (3), 1952– 1963.
Majumder, R. (2010). Modeling, stability analysis and control of microgrid Ph.D thesis
Australia: Faculty of Build and Environment Engineering., Queensland University of
Technology.
Maknouninejad, A., Qu, Z., Lewis, F. L., & Davoudi, A. (2014). Optimal, nonlinear, and
distributed designs of droop controls for dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, 5 (5), 2508– 2516.
Malik, S. M., Ai, X., Sun, Y., Zhengqi, C., & Shupeng, Z. (2016). Voltage and frequency
control strategies of hybrid ac/dc microgrid: A review. IET Generation, Transmission &
Distribution, 11 (2), 303– 313.
Martin-Martinez, F., Sánchez-Miralles, A., & Rivier, M. (2016). A literature review of
microgrids: A functional layer based classification. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 62, 1133– 1153.
Meng, L., Dragicevic, T., Vasquez, J. C., Guerrero, J. M., & Sanseverino, E. R. (2015).
Hierarchical control with virtual resistance optimization for efficiency enhancement
and state of charge balancing in dc microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE first interna-
tional conference on DC microgrids (pp. 1–6). .
149
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Meng, L., Sanseverino, E. R., Luna, A., Dragicevic, T., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M.
(2016a). Microgrid supervisory controllers and energy management systems: A lit-
erature review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 60, 1263– 1273.
Meng, W., Wang, X., & Liu, S. (2018). Distributed load sharing of an inverter-based
microgrid with reduced communication. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 9 (2),
1354– 1364.
Moayedi, S., & Davoudi, A. (2017). Unifying distributed dynamic optimization and
control of islanded dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 32 (3),
2329– 2346.
Mojica-Nava, E., Rivera, S., & Quijano, N. (2016). Distributed dispatch control in mi-
crogrids with network losses. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Conference
Application (pp. 285–290). .
Moradi, M. H., Eskandari, M., & Hosseinian, S. M. (2015). Cooperative control strategy
of energy storage systems and micro sources for stabilizing microgrids in different
operation modes. Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 78, 390– 400.
Morais, H., Sousa, T., Vale, Z., & Faria, P. (2014). Evaluation of the electric vehicle
impact in the power demand curve in a smart grid environment. Energy Conversion
and Management, 82, 268– 282.
Morstyn, T., Savkin, A. V., Hredzak, B., & Agelidis, V. G. (2017). Multi-agent sliding
mode control for state of charge balancing between battery energy storage systems
distributed in a dc microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.
Mousavi, S. Y. M., Jalilian, A., Savaghebi, M., & Guerrero, J. M. (2018). Autonomous
control of current and voltage controlled dg interface inverters for reactive power
sharing and harmonics compensation in islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics In press.
Nakazawa, C., Murakami, K., Shimasaki, Y., Hayashi, N., & Nakanishi, Y. (2013).
Hierarchical operation and control for microgrids. Proceedings of the twenty second
international conference on electricity distribution (pp. 1–4). .
Nasirian, V., Davoudi, A., & Lewis, F. L. (2014). Distributed adaptive droop control for
DC microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE applied power electronics conference and ex-
position (pp. 1147–1152). .
Nasirian, V., Moayedi, S., Davoudi, A., & Lewis, F. L. (2015). Distributed cooperative
control of dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 30 (4), 2288– 2303.
Nasirian, V., Shafiee, Q., Guerrero, J. M., Lewis, F. L., & Davoudi, A. (2016). Droop-
Free Distributed Control for AC Microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
31 (2), 1600– 1617.
Nasirian, V., Yadav, A. P., Lewis, F. L., & Davoudi, A. (2017). Distributed assistive
control of power buffers in dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 32
(4), 1396– 1406.
Nosratabadi, S. M., Hooshmand, R. A., & Gholipour, E. (2017). A comprehensive review
on microgrid and virtual power plant concepts employed for distributed energy re-
sources scheduling in power systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 67,
341– 363.
Nudell, T. R., Brignone, M., Robba, M., Bonfiglio, A., Delfino, F., & Annaswamy, A.
(2017). A dynamic market mechanism for combined heat and power microgrid
energy management. Proceedings of IFAC World Congress 50. Proceedings of IFAC
World Congress (pp. 10033–10039). .
Nutkani, I.,U., Loh, P. C., & Blaabjerg, F. (2012). Distributed control of hybrid ac
microgrids with dynamic active and reactive power capacity tuning. Proceedings of
the IEEE energy conversion congress and exposition (pp. 1954–1959). .
Nutkani, I.,U., Loh, P. C., Wang, P., & Blaabjerg, F. (2017). Decentralized economic
dispatch scheme with online power reserve for microgrids. IEEE Transactions on
Smart Grid, 8 (1), 139– 148.
Olivares, D. E., Cañizares, C. A., & Kazerani, M. (2011). A centralized optimal energy
management system for microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE PES General Meeting (pp.
1–6). .
Olivares, D. E., Cañizares, C. A., & Kazerani, M. (2014). A centralized energy man-
agement system for isolated microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 5 (4),
1864– 1875.
Oliveira, T. R., Silva, W. W., & Donoso-Garcia, P. F. (2017). Distributed secondary level
control for energy storage management in dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, 8 (6), 2591– 2607.
Oureilidis, K. O., & Demoulias, C. S. (2015). A decentralized impedance-based adaptive
droop method for power loss reduction in a converter-dominated islanded microgrid.
Sustainable Energy, Grids and Networks, 5, 39– 49.
Ovalle, A., Ramos, G., Bacha, S., Hably, A., & Rumeau, A. (2015). Decentralized control
of voltage source converters in microgrids based on the application of instantaneous
power theory. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 62 (2), 1152– 1162.
Palizban, O., Kauhaniemi, K., & Guerrero, J. M. (2014). Microgrids in active network
management—Part I: Hierarchical control, energy storage, virtual power plants, and
market participation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 36, 428– 439.
Parhizi, S., Khodaei, A., & Shahidehpour, M. (2018). Market-based versus price-based
microgrid optimal scheduling. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 9 (2), 615– 623.
Peyghami, S., Mokhtari, H., & Blaabjerg, F. (2017). Decentralized load sharing in a low
voltage direct current microgrid with an adaptive droop approach based on a su-
perimposed frequency. IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power
Electronics, 5 (3), 1205– 1215.
Peyghami-Akhuleh, S., Mokhtari, H., Loh, P. C., & Blaabjerg, F. (2016). Distributed
secondary control in dc microgrids with low-bandwidth communication link.
Proceedings of the seventh power electronics and drive system technology conference (pp.
641–645). .
Pilloni, A., Pisano, A., & Usai, E. (2018). Robust finite-time frequency and voltage
restoration of inverter-based microgrids via sliding-mode cooperative control. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 65 (1), 907– 917.
Qian, H., Zhang, J., Lai, J., & Yu, W. (2011). A high-efficiency grid-tie battery energy
storage system. IEEE Trans. on Power Electronics, 26 (3), 886– 896.
S. Sen, V. Kumar
Rahman, M. S., Mahmud, M. A., Oo, A. M. T., & Orchi, T. F. (2015). Distributed agent-
based control scheme for single-phase parallel inverters in microgrids with photo-
voltaic systems. Proceedings of the Australasian Universities power engineering con-
ference (pp. 1–6). .
Ramezani, M., & Li, S. (2016). Voltage and frequency control of islanded microgrid
based on combined direct current vector control and droop control. Proceedings of the
IEEE PES general meeting (pp. 1–5). .
Rezaei, N., & Kalantar, M. (2014). Economic–environmental hierarchical frequency
management of a droop-controlled islanded microgrid. Energy Conversion and
Management, 88, 498– 515.
Rezaei, N., Ahmadi, A., Khazali, A., & Guerrero, J. M. (2018). Energy and frequency
hierarchical management system using information gap decision theory for islanded
microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics In press.
Riverso, S., Sarzo, F., & Ferrari-Trecate, G. (2015). Plug-and-play voltage and frequency
control of islanded microgrids with meshed topology. IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, 6 (3), 1176– 1184.
Sadabadi, M. S., Karimi, A., & Karimi, H. (2015). Fixed-order decentralized/ distributed
control of islanded inverter-interfaced microgrids. Control Engineering Practice, 45,
174– 193.
Sadabadi, M. S., Shafiee, Q., & Karimi, A. (2017). Plug-and-play voltage stabilization in
inverter-interfaced microgrids via a robust control strategy. IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology, 25 (3), 781– 791.
Sahoo, S., Mishra, S., & Padhy, N. P. (2016). A decentralized adaptive droop based
power management scheme in autonomous DC microgrid. Proceedings of the IEEE PES
Asia-pacific power and energy conference (pp. 1018–1022). .
Sakurama, K., & Miura, M. (2017). Communication-based decentralized demand re-
sponse for smart microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 64 (6),
5192– 5202.
Sanseverino, E., Silvestre, M., Quang, N., Mineo, L., Guerrero, J., Luna, A., et al.
(2015). Energy management systems and tertiary regulation in hierarchical control
architectures for islanded microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE fifteenth international
conference on environment and electrical engineering (pp. 144–149). .
Savaghebi, M., Guerrero, J. M., Jalilian, A., & Vasquez, J. C. (2011). Hierarchical
control scheme for voltage unbalance compensation in islanded microgrids.
Proceedings of the thirty seventh annual conference of the IEEE industrial electronics so-
ciety (pp. 3158–3163). .
Savaghebi, M., Hashempour, M., & Guerrero, J. M. (2014). Hierarchical coordinated
control of distributed generators and active power filters to enhance power quality of
microgrids. Proceedings of the fifty fifth international scientific conference on power and
electrical engineering of Riga technical university (pp. 259–264). .
Schiffer, J., Seel, T., Raisch, J., & Sezi, T. (2014). A consensus-based distributed voltage
control for reactive power sharing in microgrids. Proceedings of the European control
conference (pp. 1299–1305). .
Schiffer, J., Seel, T., Raisch, J., & Sezi, T. (2016). Voltage stability and reactive power
sharing in inverter-based microgrids with consensus-based distributed voltage con-
trol. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 24 (1), 96– 109.
Serban, I. (2014). Frequency restoration in microgrids by means of distributed control
with minimum communication requirements. Proceedings of the IEEE twenty third
international symposium on industrial electronics (pp. 2590–2595). .
Shafie-khah, M., Neyestani, N., Damavandi, M. Y., Gil, F. A. S., & Catalão, J. P. S.
(2016). Economic and technical aspects of plug-in electric vehicles in electricity
markets. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53, 1168– 1177.
Shafiee, Q., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M. (2012). Distributed secondary control for
islanded microgrids - a networked control systems approach. Proceedings of the thirty
eighth annual conference on IEEE industrial electronics society (pp. 5637–5642). .
Shafiee, Q., Stefanovic, C., Dragicevic, T., Popovski, P., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J.
M. (2014a). Robust networked control scheme for distributed secondary control of
islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 61 (10), 5363– 5374.
Shafiee, Q., Vasquez, J. C., Guerrero, J. M., Nasirian, V., & Davoudi, A. (2015).
Cooperative frequency control for autonomous ac microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE
Eindhoven Power Technology (pp. 1–6). .
Shafiee, Q., Nasirian, V., Vasquez, J. C., Guerrero, J. M., & Davoudi, A. (2017). A multi-
functional fully distributed control framework for ac microgrids. IEEE Transactions on
Smart Grid In press.
Simpson-Porco, J. W., Shafiee, Q., Bullo, F., Shafiee, Q., & Guerrero, J. M. (2013).
Stability, power sharing, & distributed secondary control in droop-controlled mi-
crogrids. Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on smart grid communications
(pp. 672–677). .
Simpson-Porco, J. W., Shafiee, Q., Dorfler, F., Vasquez, J. C., Guerrero, J. M., & Bullo,
F. (2015). Secondary frequency and voltage control of islanded microgrids via dis-
tributed averaging. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 62 (11), 7025– 7038.
Soshinskaya, M., Graus, W., Guerrero, J., & Vasquez, J. (2014). Microgrids:
Experiences, barriers and success factors. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
40, 659– 672.
Srinivasan, M., & Kwasinski, A. (2015). Autonomous hierarchical control of dc micro-
grids with constant-power loads. Proceedings of the IEEE applied power electronics
conference and exposition (pp. 2808–2815). .
Stadler, P., Ashouri, A., & Marechal, F. (2016). Distributed model predictive control of
energy systems in microgrids. Proceedings of the annual IEEE system conference (pp. 1–
6). .
Sun, Y., Zhong, C., Hou, X., Yang, J., Han, H., & Guerrero, J. M. (2016). Distributed
cooperative synchronization strategy for multi-bus microgrids. Electrical Power and
Energy Systems, 86, 18– 28.
Sun, Y., Shi, G., Li, X., Yuan, W., Su, M., Han, H., et al. (2018). An f-P/Q droop control
in cascaded-type microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 33 (1), 1136– 1138.
Tabrizi, M. A., Radman, G., & Tamersi, A. (2012). Microgrid voltage profile
150
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
improvement using micro grid voltage controller. Proceedings of the IEEE southeastcon
(pp. 1–6). .
Tan, K. T., Peng, X. Y., So, P. L., Chu, Y. C., & Chun, M. Z. Q. (2012). Centralized
control for parallel operation of distributed generation inverters in microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, 3 (4), 1977– 1987.
Tan, K., So, P., Chu, Y., & Chen, M. (2013). A flexible ac distribution system device for a
microgrid. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 28 (3), 601– 610.
Tavakoli, A., Negnevitsky, M., & Muttaqi, K. M. (2017). A decentralized MPC for
multiple distributed generators in islanded mode of operation. IEEE Transactions on
Industry Applications, 53 (2), 1466– 1575.
Tegling, E., Andreasson, M., Simpson-Porco, J. W., & Sandberg, H. (2016). Proceedings
of the American control conference improving performance of droop-controlled microgrids
through distributed PI-control (pp. 2321–2327). .
Toub, M., Aniba, G., Maaroufi, M., & Robinet, R. D. , III (2015). Decentralized
Hamiltonian control of isolated ac microgrids: Theory & design. IEEE Innovative
Smart Grid Technologies - Asia (ISGT ASIA), 1– 6.
Trung, T. D. (2013). A robust decentralized controller design for inverter-based
Microgrids with dynamic loads. Proceedings of the annual conference of the IEEE in-
dustrial electronics society (pp. 1507–1512). .
Tsikalakis, A., & Hatziargyriou, N. (2008). Centralized control for optimizing microgrids
operation. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 23 (1), 241– 248.
Tucci, M., Riverso, S., Vasquez, J. C., Guerrero, J. M., & Ferrari-Trecate, G. (2016). A
decentralized scalable approach to voltage control of dc islanded microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 24 (6), 1965– 1979.
Ustun, T. S., Ozansoy, C., & Zayegh, A. (2011). Recent developments in microgrids and
example cases around the world-A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
15, 4030– 4041.
Vu, T. V., Perkinsa, D., Diaza, F., Gonsoulina, D., Edringtona, C. S., & El-Mezyani, T.
(2017a). Robust adaptive droop control for DC microgrids”. Electric Power Systems
Research, 146, 95– 106.
Wang, X., Blaabjerg, F., Chen, Z., & Guerrero, J. (2011). A centralized control archi-
tecture for harmonic voltage suppression in islanded microgrids. Proceedings of the
thirty seventh annual conference of the IEEE industrial electronics society (pp. 3070–
3075). .
Wang, P., Xiao, J., Setyawan, L., Jin, C., & Hoong, C. F. (2014). Hierarchical control of
active hybrid energy storage system in dc microgrids. Proceedings of the ninth IEEE
conference on industrial electronics and applications (pp. 569–574). .
Wang, Y., Chen, Z., Wang, X., Tian, Y., Tan, Y., & Yang, C. (2015a). An estimator-based
distributed voltage-predictive control strategy for ac islanded microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, 30 (7), 3934– 3951.
Wang, Z., Wu, W., & Zhang, B. (2015b). A fully distributed active power control method
with minimum generation cost in grid-connected microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE
PES general meeting (pp. 1–5). .
Wang, Z., Sun, H., & Nikovski, D. (2016a). Distributed secondary voltage controller for
droop-controlled microgrids to improve power quality in power distribution net-
works. Proceedings of the IEEE PES general meeting (pp. 1–5). .
Wang, Z., Wu, W., & Zhang, B. (2016c). A distributed control method with minimum
generation cost for dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 31 (4),
1462– 1470.
Wang, Y., Wang, X., Chen, Z., & Blaabjerg, F. (2017a). Distributed optimal control of
reactive power and voltage in islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industry
Applications, 53 (1), 340– 349.
Wang, Z., Wu, W., & Zhang, B. (2017b). A distributed quasi-newton method for droop-
free primary frequency control in autonomous microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid In Press.
Weaver, W. W., Robinett, R. D. , III, Parker, G. G., & Wilson, D. G. (2015). Distributed
control and energy storage requirements of networked dc microgrids. Control
Engineering Practice, 44, 10– 19.
Wu, X., & Shen, C. (2017). Distributed optimal control for stability enhancement of
microgrids with multiple distributed generators. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
32 (5), 4045– 4059.
Wu, D., Tang, F., Dragicevic, T., Vasquez, J. C., & Guerrero, J. M. (2013). Coordinated
primary and secondary control with frequency-bus-signaling for distributed genera-
tion and storage in islanded microgrids. Proceedings of the thirty ninth annual con-
ference of the IEEE industrial electronics society (pp. 7140–7145). .
Wu, D., Tang, F., Dragicevic, T., Vasquez, J., & Guerrero, J. (2015). A control ar-
chitecture to coordinate renewable energy sources and energy storage systems in
islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 6 (3), 1156– 1166.
Wu, X., Shen, C., & Iravani, R. (2017). A distributed, cooperative frequency and voltage
control for microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.
Xia, Y., Peng, Y., Hu, H., Wang, Y., & Wei, W. (2016). Advanced unified decentralised
control method with voltage restoration for DC microgrids. IET Renewable Power
Generation, 10 (6), 861– 871.
Xia, Y., Wei, W., Yu, M., Peng, Y., & Tang, J. (2018). Decentralized multi-time scale
power control for a hybrid ac/dc microgrid with multiple subgrids. IEEE Transactions
on Power Electronics, 33 (5), 4061– 4072.
Xiao, J., Wang, P., & Setyawan, L. (2015). Hierarchical control of hybrid energy storage
system in dc microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 62 (8), 4915–
4924.
Xiao, J., Zhang, L., Wang, P., & Xu, Q. (2016). Distributed coordination for economical
operation of power park with multiple microgrids. Proceedings of the Asian conference
on energy, power and transportation electrification (pp. 1–6). .
Xin, H., Zhang, L., Wang, Z., Gan, D., & Wong, K. P. (2015). Control of island ac
microgrids using a fully distributed approach. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 6 (2),
943– 945.
Xin, H., Zhao, R., Zhang, L., Wang, Z., Wong, K. P., & Wei, W. (2016). A decentralized
S. Sen, V. Kumar
hierarchical control structure and self-optimizing control strategy for f-P type DGs in
islanded microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 7 (1), 3– 5.
Xu, J., Zou, Y., & Niu, Y. (2013). Distributed predictive control for energy management
of multi-microgrids systems. Proceedings of the thirteenth IFAC symposium on large
scale complex systems: theory and applications (pp. 551–556). .
Xu, X., Jia, H., Wang, D., Yu, D. C., & Chiang, H. (2015). Hierarchical energy man-
agement system for multi-source multi-product microgrids. Renewable Energy, 78,
621– 630.
Xu, Q., Wang, P., Zhang, Y., Wen, C., & Xiao, J. (2016a). A decentralized control
strategy for economic operation of autonomous ac microgrids. Proceedings of the forty
second annual conference of IEEE industrial electronics society (pp. 4020–4024). .
Xu, Q., Xiao, J., Hu, X., Wang, P., & Lee, M. Y. (2017). A decentralized power man-
agement strategy for hybrid energy storage system with autonomous bus voltage
restoration and state of charge recovery. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
64 (9), 7098– 7108.
Xu, Y., Sun, H., Gu, W., Xu, Y., & Li, Z. (2018). Optimal distributed control for
secondary frequency and voltage regulation in an islanded microgrid. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics In press.
Yang, J., Jin, X., Wu, X., Acuna, P., Aguilera, R. P., Morstyn, T., et al. (2016a).
Decentralized control method for DC microgrids with improved current sharing ac-
curacy. IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, 11 (3), 696– 706.
Yao, G., Lu, Y., Tang, T., Benbouzid, M., Zheng, Y., & Wang, T. (2013). A central
control strategy of parallel inverters in ac Microgrid. Proceedings of the thirty ninth
annual conference of the IEEE industrial electronics society (pp. 7112–7117). .
Yazdanian, M., & Mehrizi-Sani, A. (2014). Distributed control techniques in microgrids.
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 5 (6), 2901– 2909.
Yoldas, Y., Onen, A., Muyeen, S., Vasilakos, A., & Alan, I. (2017). Enhancing smart grid
with microgrids: Challenges and opportunities. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 72, 205– 214.
Yue, W., Zhao, C., Lu, Y., & Li, G. (2010). A scheme of connecting microgrid to ac grid
via flexible power electronics interface. Proceedings of the international conference on
power system technology (pp. 1–6). .
Zaery, M., Ahmed, E. M., & Orabi, M. (2016). Consensus algorithm based distributed
control for economic operation of islanded dc microgrids. Proceedings of the eighteenth
international middle east power systems conference (pp. 854–859). .
151
Annual Reviews in Control 45 (2018) 118–151
Zaery, M., Ahmed, E. M., Orabi, M., & Abdelghani, A. M. (2015). Distributed cooperative
control with lower generation cost for dc microgrid. First Workshop on Smart Grid and
Renewable Energy (pp. 1–6). .
Zaidi, A., & Kupzog, F. (2008). Microgrid automation - A self-configuring approach.
Proceedings of the IEEE international multitopic conference (pp. 565–570). .
Zamora, R., & Srivastava, A. K. (2018). Multi-layer architecture for voltage and fre-
quency control in networked microgrids. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 9 (3),
2076– 2085.
Zhang, R., & Hredzak, B. (2018). Distributed finite-time multi-agent control for dc mi-
crogrids with time delays. IEEE Trans. on Smart Grid In Press.
Zhang, Z., Cai, Y., He, X., & Liu, Y. (2014). A distributed architecture based on micro-
bank modules with self-reconfiguration control regarding battery recovery effect for
dc microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE applied power electronics conference and ex-
position (pp. 3091–3096). .
Zhang, Q., Liu, Y., Zhao, Y., & Wang, N. (2015). A multi-mode operation control
strategy for flexible microgrid based on sliding-mode direct voltage and hierarchical
controls. ISA Transactions, 61, 188– 198.
Zhang, L., Xin, H., Wang, Z., & Gan, D. (2016). A decentralized quasi-hierarchical
control scheme for droop controlled AC island microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE
power and energy society general meeting (pp. 1–5). .
Zhang, H., Kim, S., Sun, Q., & Zhou, J. (2017a). Distributed adaptive virtual impedance
control for accurate reactive power sharing based on consensus control in microgrids.
IEEE Transaction on Smart Grid, 8 (4), 1749– 1761.
Zhao, X., Savaghebi, M., Guerrero, J., Vasquez, J., Sun, K., Wu, X., et al. (2015).
Negative sequence droop method based hierarchical control for low voltage ride-
through in grid-interactive microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE energy conversion
congress and exposition (pp. 6896–6903). .
Zhaoa, J., & Dorfler, F. (2015). Distributed control and optimization in dc microgrids.
Automatica, 61, 18– 26.
Zholbaryssov, M., & Dominguez-Garcia, A. D. (2017). Distributed enforcement of phase-
cohesiveness for frequency control of islanded inverter-based microgrids. IEEE
Transactions on Control of Network Systems In press.
Zhou, J., Kim, S., Zhang, H., Sun, Q., & Han, R. (2017). Consensus-based distributed
control for accurate reactive, harmonic and imbalance power sharing in microgrids.
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid In press.