Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electrical Power and Energy Systems

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

A new smart charging method for EVs for frequency control of smart grid
Saber Falahati a, Seyed Abbas Taher a,⇑, Mohammad Shahidehpour b
a
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Kashan, Kashan, Iran
b
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Nowadays, due to the shortage of fossil fuels on the one hand and their high prices on the other hand,
Received 29 June 2015 using electric vehicles (EVs) has been increased. Charging of EVs has imposed new loads on power sys-
Received in revised form 15 March 2016 tems. These new and major loads have faced the frequency control and stability of power systems with
Accepted 4 April 2016
new challenges. One way to deal with this new challenge is smart charging of EVs. In this method, grid
condition is a key parameter that affects the charging of EV. In other words, in smart charging method,
charging is performed with respect to power system parameters such as frequency. In this paper, a smart
Keywords:
charging method based on fuzzy controller is proposed, in which charging process is performed with
Smart grid
Smart charging
respect to the frequency deviation of grid and state of charge (SOC) of EV battery. To evaluate the perfor-
Fuzzy control mance of the proposed controller in control of grid frequency, IEEE 39-bus system in the presence of
Frequency control renewable energy sources is considered as test system. In order to the frequency analysis, this system
Electric vehicle is converted into a three-area system and, for each area, several EV categories with different numbers
Renewable energy resources of EVs, battery capacity, start time of charging, and initial SOC are supposed. Moreover performance of
proposed method is compared with an optimized PI controller in terms of frequency control. To investi-
gate performance of proposed method in charging of EVs, a two area system is assumed and charging of
EVs is verified by applying step loads to both areas. Simulations are carried out in MATLAB/SIMULINK
environment. Results of the simulations reveal the good performance of the proposed controller in terms
of frequency control of grid and charging of EVs.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction significant in the energy system. The national policies in many

In recent years, electric vehicles (EVs) have gained renewed
interest in the global research and industrial sectors. The major
factor causing the promotion of EVs is the pollution- and
emission-free transportation it could offer, which is a much needed
global necessity for sustainable future [1]. According to [2], the
number of EVs in the United States in 2020, 2030, and 2050 will
reach 35%, 51%, and 62%, respectively. International Energy Agency
(IEA) has predicted the sales of passenger light-duty EV/plug-in
hybrid EV will boost from 2020 on and might reach more than
100 million of EV/plug-in hybrid EV sold per year worldwide by
2050 (Fig. 1) [3]. High electric energy demand of plug-in EVs (PEVs)
on the one hand and their increasing number on the other will
impose a significant load on grids. This load, if not controlled,
may cause frequency deviation and even power system instability.
Global challenges of climate change, energy security, and envi-
ronmental pollution have made renewable energy increasingly
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
Kashan, Kashan 87317-51167, Iran. Tel./fax: +98 3615559930.
E-mail address: sataher@Kashanu.ac.ir (S.A. Taher).
countries have set ambitious targets for the promotion of renew-
able energy. In the European Union (EU), goals are set for 35% of
electricity generation from renewable sources in 2020 [1]. Since
the output power of almost all of these resources depends on envi-
ronmental conditions, their output powers are variable during the
day. So it is need to more reserve energy for frequency control of
grid. Energy storage technologies can be used for this purpose. In
Fig. 2 some of electric storage technologies have been shown. Com-
pressed air storage (CAES) is one the large-scale storage technolo-
gies in terms of power and energy capacity. However it has
limitations in geographical suitability of the installation site for
large underground caverns. The flow batteries like vanadium redox
and zinc-bromide are characterized by longer storage duration
time compared to typical electro-chemical batteries. However, this
technology is still under development stages and has some disad-
vantages which include higher capital and running cost. The lead
acid batteries are the most matured technology among the
electro-chemical batteries. Compared to these batteries, the
lithium-ion batteries have higher storage efficiency close to 100%
and a high storage capacity which are increasing further with the
introduction of its new models [1]. However use of these storage

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2016.04.039
0142-0615/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469
Fig. 1. Passenger light-duty vehicle sales [3].
Fig. 2. Comparison of electricity storage technologies based on rated power and
storage duration [1].
technologies needs to investment and it can be an obstacle for
employing of these technologies.
Demand side management (DSM) which has been used by
many researchers [4–6] can be used to deal with this problem.
Using of EVs as grid support is one of the DSM methods. In this
method, EVs are connected to the grid by bidirectional converters;
when load of the grid is low, battery is being charged; but, at high
loading of the grid, it is discharged in the grid. This concept is
known as V2G (Vehicle to Grid) and was used in [7] for the first
time. V2G concept has been employed in several papers for the fre-
quency control of grids [8–13]. In [8], V2G concept was used for the
grid frequency control along with proposing a scheduled charging
method. Ref. [9] has proposed a new coordinated V2G control and
conventional frequency controller for robust LFC in the smart grid.
In [10], decentralized V2G control was proposed for frequency reg-
ulation. But in this paper unlike Ref. [8–10] EVs have been con-
trolled by smart charging instead of V2G concept. Use of plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) along with controllable loads for
frequency control was investigated in [11]. Also, in [12], a number
of EVs and heat pump water heaters were employed as control-
lable loads for load frequency control. Unlike references [11,12]
which EVs have been used in secondary frequency control in this
paper they have been employed in primary frequency control loop.
Fuzzy control of photovoltaic systems along with using V2G for fre-
quency control was proponed in [13]. It has used from frequency
deviation of grid to control EVs charging but in this paper in addi-
tion to frequency deviation of grid, SOC of batteries have been used
for control of EVs charging.
459
Although employing V2G concept poses several benefits for the
grid, using this concept needs a variety of considerations as follows
[14]:

The grid is initially developed for a ‘‘top-down” power flow; so,
converse power flow may cause problems to it.

V2G concept may meet voltage control with some problems,
because EVs providing V2G could potentially push the grid volt-
age up before the transformer shifts to the next discrete step
and takes the voltage down again.

Synchronization between vehicle and network is an important
issue that should be considered for energy injection into grid.

Implementation of V2G concept needs the infrastructures such
as bidirectional converters.
So, currently, smart charging can be used, instead of V2G con-
cept. In this method, unidirectional converters are employed and,
with respect to the grid condition, charging is carried out. Smart
charging has been used in several works [15–18]. In [15], a method
for smart charging in IEEE 13-bus system was investigated. In this
study focus was most on voltage and current of grid. In [16], the
effects of smart charging of EVs on the lifetime of transformers
were studied. In [17], two methods of centralized and decentral-
ized smart charging were considered to minimize system-wide
generation costs while respecting grid constraints. Ref. [18] devel-
oped a decentralized smart charge controller for EVs. It proposed a
method of smart charging of EVs based on grid voltage, battery
state of health and user’s trip requirements. In Refs. [15–18] there
is no verifying on frequency control of grid but in this paper a
method for smart charging of EVs to reduce frequency deviation
of grid has been proposed. The proposed method is based on fuzzy
controller and it has been employed in primary frequency control
loop. In this method in addition to frequency deviation of grid,
SOC of EV battery is considered for control of EVs.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In the second sec-
tion, the studied system and its modeling are presented. In the
third section, the proposed controller for smart charging is
described. Moreover, a brief discussion about the fundamentals
of fuzzy controllers is given in this section. Simulations are carried
out and the results are analyzed in the fourth section. Finally, in the
fifth section, conclusions are expressed.
Modeling of system
Frequency control loops of a power system can be represented
as in Fig. 3 [19]. In this figure, primary and secondary frequency
control loops are performed on the generation side only, while ter-
tiary and emergency frequency control loops can be used on both
generation and demand sides. In Fig. 4, the relationship between
frequency deviation and control loops is shown. Values of Df 1 ,
Df 2 , Df 3 , and Df 4 in different grids are various [19]. Primary control
is governor control, which is sufficient until frequency deviation is
lower than Df 2 =2. If the value of the frequency deviation exceeds
this certain limit, then primary control will not be sufficient any-
more and secondary frequency control or supplementary control
should be employed. Secondary control is called load frequency
control (LFC). In this study, in order for the frequency control of
grid, EVs smart charging based on fuzzy controller along with gov-
ernor and secondary frequency control loops is used.
The studied IEEE 39 bus system is shown in Fig. 5. In this grid,
photovoltaic systems and EV charging stations are employed in
addition to conventional energy resources and so it is called mod-
ified IEEE 39-bus system. In order for the frequency analysis, the
above system is considered to be a three-area system, as in Fig. 6
[13,19]. In this figure, Ki(s) is controller of area i and PI controller
460 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469

Fig. 3. Frequency control loops in a power system.

Fig. 4. Relationship between frequency deviation and control loops.

is used for this purpose, as in most of the conventional power sys- area i and synchronous torque factor between areas i and j,
tems. The parameters of PI are obtained by imperialist competitive respectively. DPTie;i and Tij are obtained from the following equa-
algorithm (ICA) [20]. ICA has been used in various papers owing to tions [19]:
its high speed and accuracy in finding the solutions of optimization 2 3
problems; theory of this method has been described in detail in the XN X N XN
2p 6 7
related literatures [21–23]. In order for simplicity, conventional DPTie;i ¼ DPtie;ij ¼ 4 T ij Df i  T ij Df j 5 ð3Þ
generation resources are assumed as non-reheat steam units. j¼1
s j¼1 j¼1
j–i j–i j–i
Governor and turbine units are modeled as follows:
1 jV i jjV j j
GGov ðsÞ ¼ ð1Þ T ij ¼ cosðd0i  d0j Þ ð4Þ
1 þ sT g X ij

1 In Eq. (4), Vi, di , and Xij show terminal voltage and phase of area i
GTur ðsÞ ¼ ð2Þ and reactance between area i and j, respectively. In Fig. 6, R, D, H,
1 þ sT t
and b are droop characteristic, equivalent damping coefficient,
where Tg and Tt are governor and turbine time constants, respec- inertia constant, and frequency bias, respectively. Frequency bias
tively. In Fig. 6, DP Tie;i and Tij represent tie line power deviation of is obtained using Eq. (5):
 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469 461

G10 G8 `
PV 23
<30> <37> Area 2 <26>
<29>
<28>

<2> <25>
PV 21 <27> <38>
PV 22
<17>
G9
<1> <18>
EVs 23

EVs 21 <24>
<3>
G6
EVs 22 <16> EVs 33 <35>

<4> EVs 32

Area 1 <15>
<5> PV 14 <22>
PV 32
G1
<12> EVs 31
<6>
<39> <14> <19>
<7> <11> <23>
<13>
<8> PV 13 <20>
<36>
<10> <33>
EVs 12
<9>
EVs 13 PV 31
<31> G7
PV 12 <34> G4
<32>
EVs 11 G2 G5
Area 3
PV 11 G3

Fig. 5. Modified IEEE 39 bus system in the presence of photovoltaic systems and EVs charging stations.

Fig. 6. Equivalent three-area system.

462 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469

1 1
b¼Dþ ð5Þ
R 0.9
Since the objective of this study is to investigate the perfor- 0.8
mance of the proposed fuzzy controller for smart charging of

PV output power (pu)

0.7
EVs, accurate modeling of photovoltaic system and its controllers
is neglected and only its output power is considered. In Fig. 7(A)– 0.6
(C), the aggregated output power of photovoltaic systems in each 0.5
area in pu for 0 6 t 6 20 s is shown.
0.4
In this study, plug-in EVs are used for verifying the proposed
method for frequency control of grid. Different battery 0.3
technologies such as NiMH, Li-ion, and Lithium Polymer can be 0.2
employed for EVs [3]. In this paper, there is no concentration on
0.1
the type of battery technology and an ideal battery with no losses
is supposed for EVs. These assumptions have no effect on the 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
objective of this paper. However, three types of battery with differ- Time (s)
ent capacities are assumed. It has been supposed that there are
three charging stations in each area; each station has EVs with
A
the same battery capacity and differs from another charging 1
station. 0.9
As mentioned before, EVs charging is carried out by unidirec-
tional power electronic converters. A schematic diagram of a bat- 0.8

tery and a unidirectional converter coupled with the distribution

PV output power (pu)

0.7
node via line reactance X are represented in Fig. 8. Power received 0.6
by the battery storage can be written as:
0.5
SEV ¼ EI ð6Þ
0.4
where 0.3

0.2
V\0  E\d
I¼ ð7Þ 0.1
jX
0
In (6) and (7), SEV and I are the power and current received by 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
the battery, respectively. V and E are the voltages at the sending Time (s)
and receiving ends, respectively. d is the angle between E and V. B
X is the line reactance between the converter and the utility node.
It can be demonstrated that active and reactive powers are 1
obtained as [24]:
0.9

VE sinðdÞ 0.8
PEV ¼  ð8Þ
X
PV output power (pu)

0.7

0.6
E2  VE cosðdÞ
Q EV ¼  ð9Þ 0.5
X
0.4
In this paper, it is assumed that unidirectional converters are
controllers so that QEV = 0. It is supposed that large dynamics exist 0.3
in system and so power electronics converters are not modeled. It 0.2
has been assumed that there are high speed communication links
0.1
between charging stations and smart grid and the delay can be
neglected due to the high speed communication links. 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time (s)
Design of controller
C
Fundamentals of fuzzy control Fig. 7. Aggregated output power of photovoltaic systems of each area; (A) area 1,
(B) area 2, (C) area 3.
Unlike binary logic, fuzzy logic is a many-valued logic, in which
the fuzzy logic variables may have truth values ranging in different
degrees between 0 and 1, known as their membership grade. Fuzzy logic, and a defuzzification interface. The fuzzification interface
logic can deal with the uncertainties in the system through a sim- converts the binary logic inputs into fuzzy variables, while the
ple IF-THEN rule-based approach, thereby eliminating the need for defuzzification interface converts the fuzzy variables into binary
a mathematical model of the system. This issue is especially useful logic outputs. This conversion is achieved by means of a member-
in complex systems, for which a complete mathematical model ship function. The rule base is a collection of IF-THEN rules that
representation may not be possible. However, the fuzzy logic- describe the control strategy. The output from each rule in the rule
based system complexity increases rapidly with more number of base is deduced by the inference logic to arrive at a value for each
inputs and outputs. A fuzzy logic control (FLC) consists of four prin- output membership function. In Fig. 9, a typical fuzzy controller is
cipal components: a fuzzification interface, a rule base, inference shown [24].
 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469
Fig. 8. Scheme of EV battery and grid.
Fig. 9. A typical fuzzy controller.
Fig. 10. Proposed control system.
Design of the proposed controller
As mentioned before, in this paper, a controller based on fuzzy
logic is used for the control of EV charging in order for frequency
control of grid. In this method, each EV is connected to the grid
by a unidirectional converter. The scheme of the proposed method
is illustrated in Fig. 10. In this method, the frequency deviation of
grid and current battery SOC of EV are considered the inputs to
fuzzy controller. In the next step, with respect to these inputs
and the corresponding membership functions and fuzzy rules,
the input power to each EV is determined. Membership functions
of frequency deviation, SOC and power are represented in Fig. 11
(A)–(C), respectively. It is noteworthy to say that membership
functions of frequency deviation and SOC have been optimized
by ICA algorithm. Four parameters of frequency deviation mem-
bership functions as a, b, c and two parameters of SOC membership
function as e and f have been optimized with respect to following
fitness function:
Z
J¼ ðjDf 1 j þ jDf 2 j þ jDf 3 jÞtdt
After optimization, following results were obtained:
a ¼ 0:729985; b ¼ 0; c ¼ 0:001923; d ¼ 0:760524;
e ¼ 27:853731; f ¼ 80;
Input frequency deviation is fuzzified into the corresponding
fuzzy signals with five linguistic variables; very low (VL), low (L),
medium (M), high (H), and very high (VH). Input SOC is fuzzified
into the fuzzy regions with the same membership function names
as the frequency deviation. The output of controller is fuzzified into
463
six fuzzy regions represented by linguistic variables; very high
(VH), high (H), medium high (MH), medium low (ML), low (L),
and very low (VL). It is assumed that EV users do not use their cars
for long distances so 50% SOC is minimum value that required for
them. This assumption does not question the proposed method.
Membership functions for the output of fuzzy controller have been
obtained by both analysis and trial and error. Fuzzy rules of fuzzy
controller are given in Table 1. Fuzzy rule i in this controller is
expressed as follows [25]:
Rule i : IF Df is Lx and SOC is M y ; THEN E is Z l ð11Þ
x ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; 5; y ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; 5; l ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . . ; 6
where Lx and My show the antecedents and Zl is consequent part.
Fuzzy controller’s output E is obtained by:
,
X
25 X
25
EI ¼ xi Z l xi ð12Þ
i¼1 i¼1
where xi denotes the grade for the antecedent and is calculated by:
ð10Þ
xi ¼ xDfi xSi ð13Þ
where xDfi and xSi are the grade of antecedents for each rule.
To define rules of Table 1 analysis has been used. For example
when frequency deviation of grid is negative low (L) and SOC of
EV battery is high (H) it is obvious that EV charging power should
be very low (VL). But when frequency deviation of grid is very high
(VH) and SOC of EV battery is low (L) it can be understood that
charging power of battery should be very high (VH) to lower fre-
quency deviation of grid and increase SOC of EV battery. Other
rules of Table 1 have been obtain by same process.
464 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469

C
Fig. 11. Membership functions; (A) frequency deviation, (B) SOC, (C) power.

Table 1
Fuzzy rules of controller.

SOC/Df VL L M H VH
VL VL L ML H VH
L VL L L MH VH
M VL VL L MH H
H VL VL L MH MH
VH VL VL VL VL VL

Simulation results and discussion
Performance of proposed method on frequency control
There are several charging strategies for charging EVs, namely
dumb charging, dual-tariff, smart charging, V2G charging, etc. In
dumb charging, typically after the last trip of the day or when a
charging point is available, EVs connect to the gird and, without
any consideration, begin to charge. In this paper, to investigate
the proposed fuzzy controller for smart charging of EVs in a smart
grid in order for frequency control of grid, modified IEEE 39 bus
system in the presence of solar energy and EVs is considered and
EVs charging is carried out with the proposed smart charging
method and dumb charging. For each area, a lumped variable load
is assumed. These loads are represented in Fig. 12. For simplicity in
this paper, parameters such as daily travel distance, EV connectiv-
ity, and charging station technologies are not considered [3]. It is
also supposed that EVs with the same battery capacity in each area
Fig. 12. Lumped load of areas; (A) area 1, (B) area 2, (C) area 3.
begin to charge simultaneously. 3 kW power limit has been sup-
posed for charging of EVs. It is assumed that each area has three
types of EVs with 10, 12, and 16 kW h battery capacities. In Table 2,
the number of EVs, initial SOC, and start time of charging for all
types of EVs in each area is given. It is noteworthy to say that
the results of simulations are shown from the time of connection
of the first EVs to grid and 0 in the simulations refers to this fact.
Frequency and tie line power deviations of each area with pro-
posed controller and with dumb charging have been shown for
0 6 t 6 50 s in Figs. 13 and 14, respectively. It can be seen in these
figures that by using of proposed controller for smart charging of
EVs maximum frequency and tie line power deviations at areas
have been reduced. Results of the simulations reveal that by pro-
posed method maximum frequency deviations of areas 1 to 3 are
decreased by 36%, 45% and 22%, respectively, compared with dumb
charging. To more investigate this issue RMS value has been
defined as below
 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469 465

Table 2
EVs in each area.

EVs with 16 kW h battery EVs with 12 kW h battery EVs with 10 kW h battery

Start time of Initial SOC Number Start time of Initial SOC Number Start time of charging (s) Initial SOC Number of EVs
charging (s) of EVs charging (s) of EVs
4 75% 950 10 50% 900 0 30% 1000 First area
7 60% 1100 5 70% 1200 2 20% 800 Second area
8 55% 850 7 65% 1050 1 40% 1150 Third area

0.08
0.1
0.06

Tie line power deviation (pu)

0.05 0.04
Frequency deviation (Hz)

0.02
0
0

-0.05 -0.02

-0.04
Proposed method
-0.1 Proposed method
-0.06
Dumb charging
Dumb charging
-0.08
-0.15 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (s)
Time (s)
A
A
0.05 0.04

0.03
Tie line power deviation (pu)

0.02
Frequency deviation (Hz)

0.01

-0.05 0

-0.01

-0.1 -0.02
Proposed method Proposed method
-0.03
Dumb charging Dumb charging
-0.15 -0.04
0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (s) Time (s)

B B
0.1 0.06

0.04
Tie line power deviation (pu)

0.05
Frequency deviation (Hz)

0.02

0 0

-0.02
-0.05
-0.04

-0.1 Proposed method Proposed method

-0.06
Dumb charging Dumb charging
-0.15 -0.08
0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (s)
Time (s)
C C
Fig. 14. Tie line power deviation with proposed controller and dumb charging; (A)
Fig. 13. Frequency deviation with proposed controller and dumb charging; (A) area
area 1, (B) area 2, (C) area 3.
1, (B) area 2, (C) area 3.
466 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469

Table 3
Maximum and RMS values of frequency and tie line power deviations.

Area 1 Area 2 Area 3

With proposed With dumb With proposed With dumb With proposed With dumb
method charging method charging method charging
Maximum frequency deviation 0.0848 0.1321 0.0667 0.1221 0.0987 0.1270
Maximum tie line power 0.0625 0.0754 0.0252 0.0392 0.0446 0.0643
deviation
RMS value of frequency deviation 0.0144 0.0364 0.0123 0.0296 0.0150 0.0408
RMS value of tie line power 0.0089 0.0219 0.0052 0.0110 0.0081 0.0205
deviation

0.3

0.2
Frequency deviation (Hz)

0.1

-0.1

-0.2
Proposed method
-0.3
Optimized PI
-0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (s)
A
0.3

0.2
Frequency deviation (Hz)

0.1

-0.1

-0.2
Proposed method
-0.3
Optimized PI
-0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (s)
B
0.3

0.2
Frequency deviation (Hz)

0.1

-0.1

-0.2
Proposed method
-0.3
Optimized PI
-0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (s)

C
Fig. 15. Comparing the proposed method and optimized PI controller in terms of Fig. 16. Comparing the proposed method and optimized PI controller in terms of tie
frequency deviations; (A) area 1, (B) area 2, (C) area 3. line power deviations; (A) area 1, (B) area 2, (C) area 3.
 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469 467

Table 4
Comparing the proposed method and optimized PI controller in terms of maximum and RMS values of frequency and tie-line power deviations.

Area 1 Area 2 Area 3

With proposed With dumb With proposed With dumb With proposed With dumb
method charging method charging method charging
Maximum frequency deviation 0.2219 0.3232 0.1938 0.2780 0.1950 0.2849
Maximum tie line power 0.0432 0.0449 0.0476 0.0696 0.0626 0.0653
deviation
RMS value of frequency deviation 0.0574 0.0912 0.0514 0.0940 0.0484 0.0838
RMS value of tie line power 0.0126 0.0146 0.0112 0.0227 0.0124 0.0206
deviation

Table 5 of areas 1 to 3 are decreased by 37%, 45% and 42%, respectively,

Configurations of EVs in case study 2. than optimized PI controller.
Area Number of EVs Initial SOC (%) Start time Battery
of charging (s) capacity (kWh)
Performance of proposed method on charging EVs
Area 1 950 90 0 16
Area 2 1200 85 0 12
In this case study performance of proposed method to charging
of EVs batteries is investigated. For this purpose a two area system
with EVs as Table 5 is supposed. Area 1 and 2 of Fig. 5 are consid-
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 XN ered for this case study and it is assumed that area 3 has been
RMS ¼ kui ðtÞk2 ð14Þ removed. It is assumed that a 0.2 pu load at area 1 and a 0.1 pu load
N i¼1
at area 2 at time of 0 s are applied and at time of 1800 s, a 0.25 pu
where N represents number of samples and u(t) is considered sig- load at area 1 and 0.12 pu load at area 2 are disconnected. It can be
nal. In Table 3 maximum frequency and tie line power deviations found that each EV in area 1 needs to 1.6 kW h energy to fill its bat-
along with their RMS values for all areas has been given. It can be tery completely but in area 2 each EV needs to 1.8 kW h for full
found that by using of proposed method RMS values of frequency charging so it is expected that SOCs of EVs in area 1 reach to
deviations in areas 1, 2 and 3 have been decreased by 60%, 59%
and 63%, respectively and RMS values of tie line power deviations
have been reduced by 59%, 53% and 60% for areas 1, 2 and 3, 0
respectively.
-500
In order to comparison simulations are carried out by an opti-
mized PI controller. PI controller has been optimized by ICA algo- -1000
rithm and with respect to fitness function of Eq. (10). The test
Total power (kW)

-1500
system considered as above but in absence of solar energies. In
Fig. 15(A)–(C) frequency deviations of area 1 to 3 have been repre- -2000
sented by using of proposed method and optimized PI controller.
As can be seen from these figures by using of proposed method fre- -2500

quency deviations of all areas are reduced than optimized PI con- -3000 Area 1
troller. In Fig. 16(A)–(C) tie-line power deviations of all areas by
aforementioned methods have been shown. These figures show -3500
Area 2
better response of proposed method than optimized PI controller
-4000
too. In Table 4 maximum and RMS values of frequency deviation 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
have been given. It can be found that by proposed method maxi- TIme (s)
mum frequency deviations of areas 1 to 3 are reduced by 31%, A
30% and 32% respectively, and RMS values of frequency deviations
-900

105
-950
Total power (kW)

100 -1000
SOC (%)

-1050
95

Area 1
-1100

90 Area 2
EVs of area 1
-1150
EVs of area 2 1800 1800.5 1801 1801.5 1802 1802.5 1803
TIme (s)
85
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
B
TIme (s)
Fig. 18. Total absorbed power; (A) between 0 and 8100 s, (B) a zoomed view of
Fig. 17. SOCs of EVs. absorbed power when loads disconnected.
468 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469

0.2 Appendix A

System parameters
0
Area 1
Frequency deviation (Hz)

-0.2 R1 = 3 Hz/s
Tg1 = 0.08 s
Tt1 = 0.4 s
-0.4
D1 = 0.0084 pu/Hz
H1 = 0.1677/2 pu s
Area 1 T12 = 0.20 pu/Hz
-0.6
T13 = 0.25 pu/Hz
Area 2
-0.8
0 5 10 15 20 Area 2
Time (s)
R2 = 2.73 Hz/s
Fig. 19. Frequency deviations of area 1 and area 2 in first 20 s. Tg2 = 0.06 s
Tt2 = 0.44 s
D2 = 0.016 pu/Hz
100% faster than EVs in area 2. In Fig. 17 SOCs of EVs in area 1 and
H2 = 0.2017/2 pu s
area 2 have been shown. Battery SOC is calculated by:
T21 = 0.20 pu/Hz
Q1  Q2 T23 = 0.12 pu/Hz
SOC ¼ ð15Þ
Q1
Area 3
where Q1 represents battery capacity and Q2 is output energy. It can
be seen that SOCs of EVs of area 1 which have 90% initial SOC, reach R3 = 2.82 Hz/s
to 100% after elapsing time of approximately 1.5 h and SOCs of area Tg3 = 0.07 s
2 with 85% initial SOC reach to 100% after approximately 2 h. Tt3 = 0.30 s
The total energy that EVs in area 1 absorb from grid for full D3 = 0.015 pu/Hz
charging is 1520 kW h and for EVs in area 2 is 2160 kW h. In H3 = 0.1247/2 pu s
Fig. 18(A) power absorbed by EVs in area 1 and 2 have been shown T31 = 0.25 pu/Hz
and in Fig. 18(B) a zoomed view of total absorbed power changes T32 = 0.12 pu/Hz
has been presented when loads of area 1 and 2 at 1800 s are dis- Sbase = 100 MW
connected. By computing areas of figures in Fig. 18(A) it can be
found that 1520 kW h energy is sent to area 1 and area 2 receives Parameters of PI controllers
2160 kW h energy from grid. It can be seen that changes of power
absorbed in two areas is different from each other. This is because K1(s) = 0.33–0.37/s
frequency deviations and initial SOCs of EVs’ batteries in areas 1 K2(s) = 0.36–0.34/s
and 2 are different and so according to fuzzy rules of Table 1, K3(s) = 0.25–1/s
absorbed powers become different. In order to comparison fre-
quency deviations of areas 1 and 2 have been displayed in Fig. 19
for first 20 s. References

Conclusion
In this paper, a new approach based on fuzzy control was pro-
posed for the smart charging of EVs. In this approach, unidirec-
tional converters were used instead of bidirectional converters in
the vehicle to grid concept. To investigate the proposed method,
IEEE 39 bus system in the presence of solar energy resources was
considered in case study 1. Results of the simulations revealed that,
by the proposed method, maximum frequency deviations of areas
1 to 3 was decreased by 36%, 45%, and 22%, respectively, in com-
parison to dumb charging. Moreover, it was illustrated that, using
the proposed method, RMS values of frequency deviations in areas
1 to 3 were reduced by 60%, 59%, and 63%, respectively, compared
with the case of using dumb charging. In another case study, per-
formance of proposed method is compared with an optimized PI
controller. The results of the simulations illustrated good perfor-
mance of the proposed method in this case as well so that, by using
the proposed method, maximum frequency deviations of areas 1 to
3 were reduced by 31%, 30%, and 32%, respectively, than the opti-
mized PI controller. Performance of the proposed method in charge
of EVs in a two area system was verified in another case study,
which showed that the proposed method properly charged EVs.
[1] Pillai JR. Electric vehicle based battery storages for large scale wind power
integration in Denmark [Ph.D. thesis]. Aalborg, Denmark, December 2010.
[2] Dán A, Farkas C, Prikler L. V2G effects on frequency regulation and under-
frequency load shedding in a quasi-islanded grid. In: PowerTech, IEEE
Grenoble, 2013. p. 1–6.
[3] Garcia-Valle R, Pecas Lopes JA. Electric vehicle integration into modern power
networks. Springer; 2013.
[4] Jiang H, Lin J, Song Y, Gao W, Xu Y, Shu B, et al. Demand side frequency control
scheme in an isolated wind power system for industrial aluminum smelting
production. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2014;29(2):844–53.
[5] Molina-Garciá A, Bouffard F, Kirschen DS. Decentralized demand-side
contribution to primary frequency control. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2011;26
(1):411–9.
[6] Molina-Garciá A, Bouffard F, Kirschen DS. Demand-side contribution to
primary frequency control with wind farm auxiliary control. IEEE Trans
Power Syst 2014;29(5):2391–9.
[7] Kempton W, Letendre SE. Electric vehicles as anew power source for electric
utilities. Transp Res D 1997;2(3):157–75.
[8] Ota Y, Taniguchi H, Nakajima T, Liyanage KM, Baba J, Yokoyama A.
Autonomous distributed V2G (Vehicle-to-Grid) satisfying scheduled
charging. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2012;3(1).
[9] Vachirasricirikul S, Ngamroo I. Robust LFC in a smart grid with wind power
penetration by coordinated V2G control and frequency controller. IEEE Trans
Smart Grid 2014;5(1).
[10] Liu H, Hu ZC, Song YH, Lin J. Decentralized vehicle-to-grid control for primary
frequency regulation considering charging demands. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2013;28(3):3480–9.
[11] Galus MD, Koch S, Anderson G. Provision of load frequency control by PHEVs,
controllable loads, and a cogeneration unit. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 2011;58
(10).
 S. Falahati et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 83 (2016) 458–469
[12] Masuta T, Yokoyama A. Supplementary load frequency control by use of a
number of both electric vehicles and heat pump water heaters. IEEE Trans
Smart Grid 2012;3(3).
[13] Datta M, Senjyu T. Fuzzy control of distributed PV inverters/energy storage
systems/electric vehicles for frequency regulation in a large power system.
IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2013;4(1).
[14] Bahmani MH, Abolfazli M, Afsharnia S, Sadegh Ghazizadeh M. Introducing a
new concept to utilize plug-in electric vehicles in frequency regulation service.
In: 2nd international conference on control, instrumentation and automation
(ICCIA). p. 106–9.
[15] Sharma I, Canizares C, Bhattacharya K. Smart charging of PEVs penetrating into
residential distribution systems. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2014;5(3):1196–209.
[16] Hilshey AD, Hines PDH, Rezaei P, Dowds JR. Estimating the impact of electric
vehicle smart charging on distribution transformer aging. IEEE Trans Smart
Grid 2013;4(2):905–13. 2014.
[17] Gonzalez Vaya M, Andersson G. Centralized and decentralized approaches to
smart charging of plug-in vehicles. In: IEEE power and energy society general
meeting. p. 1–8.
[18] Jiang T, Putrus G, Gao Z, Conti M, McDonald S, Lacey G. Development of a
decentralized smart charge controller for electric vehicles. Int J Electr Power
Energy Syst 2014;61:355–70.
469
[19] Bevrani H. Robust power system frequency control. 2nd ed. Springer; 2014.
[20] Atashpaz-Gargari E, Lucas C. Imperialist competitive algorithm: An algorithm
for optimization inspired by imperialistic competition. In: IEEE congress on
evolutionary computation. p. 4661–7.
[21] Taher SA, Hajiakbari Fini M, Falahati Aliabadi S. Fractional order PID controller
design for LFC in electric power systems using imperialist competitive
algorithm. Ain Shams Eng J 2014;5:121–35.
[22] Hadji MM, Vahidi B. A solution to the unit commitment problem using
imperialistic competition algorithm. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2012;27
(1):117–24.
[23] Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Eivazy H, Ghodsi R, Rezaei K, Atashpaz-Gargari E. Solving
the integrated product mix-out sourcing problem using the imperialist
competitive algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 2010;37(12):7615–26.
[24] Singh M, Kumar P, Kar I. Implementation of vehicle to grid infrastructure using
fuzzy logic controller. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2012;3(1):565–77.
[25] Datta M. Fuzzy logic based frequency control by V2G aggregators. In: IEEE 5th
international symposium on power electronics for distributed generation
systems (PEDG). p. 1–8.