This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy.
This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364
Adaptive Dynamic Voltage Support Scheme for
Fault Ride-Through Operation of a Microgrid
Bonu Ramesh Naidu Member, IEEE, Prabodh Bajpai, Senior Member, IEEE, Chandan Chakraborty, Fellow, IEEE,
M. Malakondaiah, B Kalyan Kumar, Member, IEEE
Abstract—This paper proposes a control strategy for enabling
voltage fault ride-through (VFRT) operation with adaptive dy-
namic voltage support (DVS) scheme using the energy stor-
age in a microgrid. Firstly, the condition for maximum DVS
from the microgrid is presented and its dependency on the
parameters of the equivalent network seen by the microgrid
is elucidated. Considering the impediments associated with the
real-time parameter estimation during the short-term voltage
disturbances, reference current signals based on the extreme
voltage tracking algorithm are proposed in this paper to achieve
an adaptive DVS irrespective of the varying system conditions.
Secondly, a control strategy is proposed to enable the energy
storage-based VFRT operation of a microgrid. Thirdly, a unique
methodology of sizing the energy storage for VFRT operation
is presented considering the grid code requirements, equivalent
network characteristics, and the maximum current rating of the
power electronic interface with the grid. The proposed control
strategy is validated through real-time digital simulation case
studies for low-voltage, high-voltage, and multiple-fault scenarios.
The scalability of the proposed approach is illustrated using the
CIGRE distribution test network.
Keywords—Dynamic voltage support, Energy storage, Microgrid,
Real-time digital simulations, Voltage fault ride-through operation.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The exigency for mandatory services like voltage fault ride-
through (VFRT) operation from microgrid/distributed energy
resource (DER) is becoming vital to maintaining the stability
and reliability of the utility grid in the wake of their increasing
penetration. The VFRT operation requires the grid-connected
generating unit to stay connected to the utility grid as long
as the deviations in the voltage are within a VFRT charac-
teristic curve (voltage vs. time) according to the grid code
[1]. The generating unit shall additionally support the local
voltage by controlling its real and reactive power output. The
recently published IEEE 1547:2018 standard has mandated
VFRT operation from the DER and also included many ad-
ditional features like multiple performance regions within the
VFRT curve (using multiple over voltage and under voltage
functions), consecutive VFRT requirements, DER abnormal
Bonu Ramesh Naidu, Prabodh Bajpai and Chandan Chakraborty are with the
Department of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kharag-
pur, India (e-mails: bonurameshnaidu@iitkgp.ac.in; pbajpai@ee.iitkgp.ac.in;
chakraborty@ieee.org).
M. Malakondaiah and B Kalyan Kumar are with the Department of
Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, India (e-mails:
malakondareddy.24@gmail.com; bkalyan@ee.iitm.ac.in).
© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
performance category (APC) classification, requirements for
dynamic voltage support (DVS), etc. [2].
The DVS from the inverter interfaced grid-following DER
is its ability to exchange suitable current with the network
during severe voltage excursions in a way to improve the
voltage profile of the network and avoids situations leading to
VFRT or trip operations. The magnitude and the phase angle
of the current output from the grid-following DER are the
primary factors that determine the extent of voltage support
from it [3]. Various decentralized and centralized schemes
based on the current control of grid-connected inverters are
discussed in the literature to provide voltage support during
the VFRT operation. This includes control based on constant
reactive current [4], reactive current vs voltage [5], [6] etc.
Authors in [7] presented a voltage support technique based
on a reactive power compensator that considers both positive
sequence voltage at the PCC and the reactive power supplied
by the filter capacitor to decide the reactive power reference
for the voltage support. The above-stated methods resort to
real power curtailment whenever required to provide room
for the dynamic reactive power required during severe voltage
deviations. Despite the promising results for DVS operation,
their effectiveness is merely limited to the medium and high
voltage section of the utility grid where the X R (reactance to
resistance) ratio of the lines is high. The distribution grid
feeders with low X R ratio shift the dependency of voltage
support from reactive current to real current injection [3]. The
DVS from the distributed generation (DG) units connected to
the low voltage grid is discussed in a few pieces of literature
where, the sensitivity analysis is carried out [8] and current
control is based on maximizing real current injection during
the voltage sag using the inverter maximum current limit [9]
resulted in an improvement but not to the maximum voltage,
which is vital during severe voltage deviations in VFRT
operation. Additionally, none of the methods discussed above
is adaptive to the varying network conditions while providing
the DVS.
Authors in [3] have presented an analysis that depicts the
dependency of the maximum voltage support from the inverter
on the X R ratio of the network seen by the inverter interface
with the grid. The maximum DVS can be realized only
when the near-accurate measurement of varying utility grid
impedance is obtained in real-time. An optimal voltage support
control is proposed in [10] for low voltage grids under fault
conditions. However, the authors assumed that the X R ratio
of the grid is known beforehand to enable the DVS during
the VFRT operation and suggested that the X R ratio of the
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364
grid can be obtained using a wide-band system identification
techniques [11], [12]. However, the accuracy of such methods
depends on many factors like the magnitude and bandwidth
of the perturbation signal, presence of non-linear elements
in the network etc. Through rigorous mathematical analysis,
the authors have concluded that the maximum voltage support
from the DER not only depends on the X R ratio of the Thevenin
impedance seen by the microgrid but also on a few other
parameters of the equivalent network seen by the DER as
detailed in the upcoming section. The real-time measurement
or estimation of near-accurate equivalent network parameters
is a difficult task altogether, due to the very short time duration
of the fault voltage and the dynamic nature of the utility grid.
Hence, a method that outputs the inverter current references
without actually measuring the equivalent network parameters
for facilitating maximum DVS despite the varying network
conditions is the need of the hour.
Voltage support during VFRT operation may sometimes
require curtailment of real current to create space for the
reactive current, resulting in an imbalance at the DC terminals
of the inverter as long as the renewable energy unit is operated
in maximum power point tracking (MPPT) mode. Possible
solutions are to operate the renewable energy unit in Off-MPPT
mode [13], to use a crowbar circuit or energy storage at the DC
bus [14], [15], and to oversize the inverters [16]. The recent
developments in energy storage technologies led to a decline
in their cost and widened their application areas [17]. The
method based on energy storage at the DC terminals of the
inverter stores the otherwise wasted solar PV power and can
provide additional services to the microgrid/utility grid like
fast frequency reserves, ramp up/down support, frequency FRT
support, electrical inertia, black start operation, etc. Further,
during low generation from renewable energy units, the energy
storage can be used to support the network voltage. A generic
methodology that quantifies the contribution of energy storage
for VFRT operation and thereby sizes them for this application
is yet unaddressed. Additionally, considering energy storage-
based VFRT operation, the control of energy storage in coor-
dination with the other sources/storage devices in the DER is a
vital task to achieve the adaptive DVS based VFRT operation.
It is evident from the above discussion that a control strategy
that enables VFRT operation of the microgrid/DER under
dynamic network conditions considering the participation of
energy storage inherent to the microgrid and also guarantees
an adaptive DVS despite varying network conditions during
severe voltage variations is probably not yet addressed. The
major contributions of this paper are listed as follows.
1) An adaptive DVS scheme using the extreme voltage
tracking (EVT) algorithm to decide the microgrid out-
put current characteristics for facilitating the best pos-
sible DVS at the point of common coupling (PCC) in
real-time and generate reference current signals (RCS)
during any external voltage fault condition.
2) A control strategy that combines the VFRT detection,
adaptive DVS with RCS for real and reactive current,
and control of energy storage for achieving low or high
VFRT operation of a microgrid.
3) A unique methodology for analyzing the role of energy
© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
storage of a microgrid based on the VFRT characteris-
tic, inverter maximum current rating, and the possible
worst-case equivalent network parameters to evaluate
the sufficiency of the available energy storage for
achieving the VFRT operation with the proposed DVS
scheme.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section
II presents the analysis for maximum DVS1 followed by
the proposed RCS and the adaptive DVS algorithm. Section
III presents the control strategy followed by the role and
sizing of energy storage for achieving the VFRT operation
in section IV. The validation of the proposed control strategy
using appropriate test cases is presented in section V and the
conclusions in section VI.
II. A DAPTIVE DYNAMIC VOLTAGE S UPPORT S CHEME
The DVS capability of a microgrid is analyzed through
appropriate mathematical modelling and the condition for
maximum DVS is derived in this section. Further, an algorithm
for facilitating the adaptive DVS operation based on the EVT
principle is discussed along with the design process for critical
parameters of the algorithm.
A. Maximum Dynamic Voltage Support from a Microgrid
The equivalent circuit of the grid-connected microgrid is
presented in Fig. 1 [4]. The microgrid is modelled as a current
source (I⃗inv,pu ), the local load and the filters are represented as
Ẑl,pu ), the distribution lines/feeders connecting the microgrid
with the substation are modelled as Ẑline,pu ), the other loads at
the substation are represented as a lumped impedance (Ẑsl,pu ),
the fault on the network is modelled as a parallel impedance
(Ẑg,pu ) at the substation and the network beyond the substation
(including the substation transformer) is represented by Ẑg,pu
and V ⃗g,pu . The Thevenin equivalent impedance seen from the
microgrid terminals during the fault is given by the following
expression
Ẑl,pu Ẑline,pu + Ẑl,pu Ẑ1,pu
|Zth,pu |̸ ζ = Rth,pu + jXth,pu =
Ẑl,pu + Ẑline,pu + Ẑ1,pu
(1)
where
1 The maximum DVS essentially means achieving maximum voltage during
low VFRT operation and minimum voltage during the high VFRT operation.
PCC
Iinv,pu Z^line,pu Z^g,pu
Vinv,pu Z^l,pu Z^sl,pu Z^f,pu
Vg,pu
Local load Distribution lines and
Microgrid and filters substation loads Fault Rest of the network
Figure 1: Equivalent circuit of a grid-connected microgrid
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

1.3
I(q) =-0.766pu and I(d) =0.643pu Xth,pu/Rth,pu=0.577 ( =30o)
inv,pu inv,pu
A Xth,pu/Rth,pu=1.000 ( =45o)
1.2
Ẑsl,pu Ẑf,pu Ẑg,pu Xth,pu/Rth,pu=1.732 ( =60o)
Ẑ1,pu = (2)
Ẑsl,pu Ẑf,pu + Ẑsl,pu Ẑg,pu + Ẑf,pu Ẑg,pu 1.1 I(q)
inv,pu
=-0.342pu
I(d)
inv,pu
=0.940pu
Similarly, the Thevenin voltage seen by the microgrid is

Voltage (pu)
1
I(q) =0.573pu
given below. inv,pu
I(d) =-0.819pu
I(q)
inv,pu
=0.766pu
inv,pu
0.9 I(d)
inv,pu
=-0.643pu

2 I(q) =-0.573pu
Ẑl,pu Ẑ2,pu + Ẑl,pu Ẑline,pu Ẑ2,pu 0.8
inv,pu

|Vth,pu |̸ δ = ⃗g,pu
×V I(d)
inv,pu
=0.819pu
I(q) =0.342pu
B
2
(Ẑ2,pu + Ẑg,pu )(Ẑl,pu 2
+ Ẑline,pu )+A inv,pu
0.7 I(d)
inv,pu
=-0.940pu
(3)
where 0.6
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Reactive current (pu)
Ẑsl,pu Ẑf,pu
Ẑ2,pu = (4) Figure 3: Terminal voltage (vinv,pu ) vs reactive current (iinv,pu ) plot
(q)
Ẑsl,pu + Ẑf,pu

the variation of terminal voltage (vinv,pu ) with respect to the

A = 2Ẑl,pu (Ẑline,pu Ẑg,pu + Ẑline,pu Ẑ2,pu ) (q)
per unit q-axis current output (iinv,pu ) of the microgrid2 . It is
+ Ẑl,pu Ẑg,pu Ẑ2,pu + Ẑline,pu Ẑg,pu Ẑ2,pu (5) (q)
evident that the vinv,pu vs iinv,pu curve is oval-shaped with
Therefore, the simplified equivalent circuit of Fig. 1 during clearly defined maximum and minimum voltage points for a
fault considering |Vth,pu |̸ δ and |Zth,pu |̸ ζ is shown in Fig. given network condition. The following relation for achieving
2. Therefore, the PCC voltage is written as shown below. extreme voltage conditions (either maximum or minimum
voltage) is obtained using (7) and (8).
⃗inv,pu = |Vth,pu |̸ δ + |Iinv,pu × Zth,pu |̸ (β + ζ)
V (6) (q)
iinv,pu
(d)
= tan (δ − ζ) (9)
where the first term |Vth,pu |̸ δ represents the Thevenin iinv,pu
voltage seen at the PCC in the absence of current contribution
from the microgrid and the second term represents the voltage Considering the plot for ζ=30o (highlighted with black
support due to the current contribution from the microgrid (β colour in Fig. 3), the maximum and minimum voltages are
is the power factor angle between V ⃗inv,pu and I⃗inv,pu ). The occurring at point A (corresponding to β=−20o ) and at point
magnitude of the PCC voltage given in (6) is shown below. B (corresponding to β=−200o ) respectively as per (8) and
(9). For achieving maximum and minimum voltage at the
q PCC as per the (9), the microgrid should be operated as
|Vinv,pu | = 2
Vth,pu + ∆V 2 + 2|Vth,pu × ∆V |cos(δ − β − ζ) an over-excited real power source and under-excited real
(7) power sink respectively i.e. a positive and negative value
where ∆V = Iinv,pu × Zth,pu . The angle β expressed in for real and reactive current references during over-excited
terms of the positive sequence dq-axis currents of the microgrid real power source mode and vice-versa for the under-excited
is given below. case. For δ ≈ 0 (due to the network conditions or due
to the PLL synchronization), the current output from the
(q) microgrid for extreme voltage at the  PCC solely depends on
!
−1
iinv,pu Xth,pu
β = tan (d)
(8) the impedance angle ζ = tan−1 Rth,pu . However, when
iinv,pu
δ ̸= 0 (during transients), the current references are obtained
(d) (q)
where iinv,pu and iinv,pu are the positive sequence real and from tan (δ − ζ) rather than the tan(ζ).
reactive currents of the microgrid respectively. Figure 3 depicts Referring to (6) and Fig. 3, the magnitude of the maxi-
mum and minimum voltage varies with the value of |Vth,pu |,
|Iinv,pu | and |Zth,pu | and is constant despite the change in
PCC δ and ζ as long as the |Zth,pu | is constant. However, the
(d) (q)
Iinv,pu Z^th,pu ratio of the inverter currents (iinv,pu and iinv,pu ) at which
Vinv,pu the extreme voltage is obtained varies with a variation in δ or
Vth,pu ζ or both as per (9) and any change in these variables during
the VFRT operation need to be counteracted by adjusting the
(d)∗
real and reactive current references of the inverter (iinv,pu and
Microgrid Rest of the network

2 The plot is generated using (6) assuming |V

th,pu | =1pu, |Iinv,pu | =1pu,
Figure 2: Simplified equivalent circuit during fault |Zth,pu |=0.2pu, and δ = 10o . β is varied from 0o to 360o and the plots are
shown for ζ=30o , 45o , and 60o .

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

(q)∗ Start
iinv,pu ) as per (9) subject to the inverter maximum current
max
rating (Iinv,pu ) given below to facilitate the maximum DVS. (q) (d)
Iest,pu Iest,pu
Set (d) (k) =0 for low VFRT and (q)
(k) =0 for high VFRT
q Iest,pu Iest,pu
(d) (q) max
(iinv,pu )2 + (iinv,pu )2 = Iinv,pu (10) k = k+1
k = k+1
(d) (q) (d)
Measure vinv,pu (k) , |iinv,pu (k)|, and |iinv,pu (k)|

Apply RCS-I
B. Algorithm for Adaptive Dynamic Voltage Support Scheme No Are VFRT Yes
conditions
The RCS used in the literature for achieving the DVS met ?
Extreme Voltage
operation can be broadly classified into two types i.e, RCS-I & Yes Low No Tracking (EVT) Algorithm
II. The current references for the RCS along with the proposed voltage?
scheme (RCS-III) are listed in Table I. All the RCS adhere (d) (q) (d) (d)
max Compute dvinv,pu (k) and diinv,pu (k) Compute dvinv,pu (k) and diinv,pu (k)
to the maximum current rating of the inverter (Iinv,pu ) as
(d)∗ (q)∗
stated in (10). A negative iinv,pu and iinv,pu indicates the real Yes (q)
diinv,pu (k) > dimin ?
No Yes (d)
diinv,pu (k) > dimin ?
No
current absorption from the utility grid and a reactive current
(q) (q) (q) (d) (d) (d)
injection into the utility grid respectively. The RCS-I prioritizes diinv,pu (k) = diinv,pu (k) diinv,pu (k) = dimin diinv,pu (k) = diinv,pu (k) diinv,pu (k) = dimin
the maximum available real current during extreme voltage (d) (d)
dvinv,pu dvinv,pu
variations and the remaining capacity (if any) is used for Compute (q)
(k) Compute (d)
(k)
diinv,pu diinv,pu
reactive current exchange. The reactive current is prioritized
in RCS-II under extreme voltage variations with real current (d) (d) (d)
curtailment. The RCS-I and II are not adaptive to the dynamic (q)
Iest,pu
(q)
Iest,pu
(d)
dvinv,pu Iest,pu Iest,pu dvinv,pu
(k) = (k) = (k-1) + G× (k)
(d) (d)
(k-1) + G× (k) (q) (q) (d)
(q) Iest,pu Iest,pu diinv,pu
network conditions and may fail to provide the best possible Iest,pu Iest,pu diinv,pu
DVS. (q)
Iest,pu
(d)
Iest,pu -1
A fast and accurate method for the parameter estimation (d)
Iest,pu
(k) = (q)
Iest,pu
(k)

of the equivalent network seen by the microgrid during the

short course of a VFRT operation is vital. To the author’s best k=k+1 Apply RCS-III (proposed)
knowledge, there is hardly any communication-independent (d)
dvinv,pu
(k)= 0 k = k+1
method that can perform accurate parameter estimation of the (d)
(d)
diinv,pu
equivalent network seen by the microgrid during the VFRT dvinv,pu Yes (d) No
(k)= 0 vinv,pu (k) =1pu ?
(q)
events. Considering the characteristics of the voltage curve diinv,pu

presented in Fig. 3 and the support from energy storage, it
is possible to apply a hill climbing technique to track the apex
or nadir point of the curve during the VFRT operation by
perturbing the inverter current references [18]. Therefore, the
authors proposed to perturb the inverter current references for
facilitating a current output from the inverter satisfying (9) and
(10) without relying on the information of the network beyond
the PCC. The proposed RCS-III appropriately allocates the real
and reactive current during VFRT operation as listed in Table
I considering the relation between the current references of
the inverter and the parameters of the equivalent network as
per (9). The proposed RCS-III in this paper can facilitate the
available maximum or minimum voltage during the low and
Figure 4: Flowchart of the adaptive DVS scheme
(d) (q)
The terminal parameters of the inverter i.e. vinv,pu , iinv,pu
(d)
and iinv,pu are measured at every sampling instant (k) as
shown in flowchart of Fig. 4. The proposed adaptive DVS
scheme acts as an outer controller for the grid-connected
inverter during VFRT operation and hence, the time duration of
each sample k should be equal to or greater than the response
time of the inner current controller. The adaptive DVS scheme
(d)
checks the VFRT conditions by comparing the vinv,pu with the
VFRT characteristic curve. On the onset of a VFRT event, the
I
(q)
I
(d)

high VFRT operation respectively despite the varying network proposed scheme initializes the parameters est,pu
(d) and est,pu
(q)
Iest,pu Iest,pu
(q)
conditions with the
Iest,pu
estimated in real-time using the individually to zero for low VFRT operation and high VFRT
(d)
Iest,pu (d) (q)
operation respectively, and computes dvinv,pu (k), diinv,pu (k)
EVT algorithm to make it an adaptive DVS scheme. Unlike the (d)
normal operating condition where the inverter is responsible and diinv,pu (k) as shown below.
for the DC bus voltage control of the microgrid (to transfer the (d) (d) (d)
available maximum power from the renewable energy units to dvinv,pu (k) = vinv,pu (k) − vinv,pu (k − 1) (11)
the utility grid), the AC voltage control should be prioritized
during the VFRT operation to effectively support the utility (dq) (dq) (dq)
grid to ride-through short-term faults. This requires the DC diinv,pu (k) = |iinv,pu (k)| − |iinv,pu (k − 1)| (12)
bus voltage control to be transferred to other devices in the (d)
dvinv,pu
microgrid i.e. the energy storage or a DC crowbar so that the The EVT algorithm computes (q) i.e. slope of the
inverter can appropriately modify its real and reactive current diinv,pu
(q)
injection adhering to RCS-III. characteristics presented in Fig. 3. The parameter diinv,pu is

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

Table I: d-axis and q-axis RCS with the proposed DVS scheme
 
(q)∗
 
Signal (d)∗ q-axis current reference iinv,pu Remarks
d-axis current reference iinv,pu
max
±Iinv,pu (subject to availability of Applied during normal operation in this work and
RCS-I [9] 0 pu
real power source) also used for comparison during VFRT operation
max Not applied in this work and used only for
RCS-II [7] 0 pu ∓Iinv,pu
comparison during VFRT operation
r Applied during low and high VFRT operation by
v !2  2 2 (q)
RCS-III Iest,pu

u (q) max (d)∗

max
 u Iest,pu ∓ Iinv,pu − iinv,pu using the real-time estimated (d) and is thus
(proposed) ± Iinv,pu ÷t1 + (d)
 Iest,pu
Iest,pu adaptive to the network operating condition

limited to dimin to avoid large step sizes for small variations in & observe principle. Further, referring to (6), any change in
(q) (d)
iinv,pu that may lead to unwanted disturbances. The estimated the δ, ζ, |Zeq,pu |, and |Vth,pu | that leads to a shifting of vinv,pu
(q)
Iest,pu to a non-maximum point during the course of a VFRT event is
(d) during low VFRT operation at k th sampling instant is (q)
Iest,pu
Iest,pu
counteracted by the EVT algorithm and the (d) is updated
given by Iest,pu
accordingly (if required). During a high voltage fault condition,
(d)
Iest,pu
(q) (q)
" (d)
dvinv,pu
# similar control is utilized to obtain that translates to
Iest,pu Iest,pu (q)
Iest,pu
(d)
(k) = (d)
(k − 1) + G × (q)
(k) (13) (q)
Iest,pu
Iest,pu Iest,pu diinv,pu (d) as shown in Fig. 43 .
Iest,pu
Unlike conventional hill climbing techniques that estimate The EVT algorithm alone may settle PCC voltage to extreme
the required variable using a fixed perturbation, the term voltage value depending on operating conditions and that
(d)
dvinv,pu may be >1 in low VFRT and <1 in high VFRT, which is
G× (q) is the adaptive step used in this work to estimate not desirable, especially under low short circuit ratio (SCR)
diinv,pu
(q)
Iest,pu conditions. Therefore, the proposed adaptive DVS scheme
(d) . The scaling factor G is a positive constant and the sign (q)
Iest,pu
Iest,pu stops updating the (d) (k) when the voltage at the PCC
(d) Iest,pu
dvinv,pu
of (q) decides the direction of the step. The design of G reaches 1pu as shown in Fig. 4. Such an operation ensures
diinv,pu
that the PCC voltage is either maintained at 1pu if possible
is critical to achieving a balance between the steady-state and
or at the extreme voltage available at that operating condition,
dynamic performance of the system and is calculated using the
thus making it an adaptive DVS scheme.
following expression [19].
The proposed DVS scheme is part of the inverter control
h (q) i and should co-exist with the other control strategies of the
∆Imax × ∆ II (d) inverter like grid synchronization, DC bus voltage control, PCC
max
G= (14) voltage control, VFRT detection etc. Additionally, the role of
∆Vmax
h (q) i energy storage inherent to the microgrid is vital in achieving
where ∆ II (d) is the maximum safe perturbation al- the proposed adaptive DVS scheme as already elucidated in
max this section. Hence, a control strategy that summarizes the
(q)
Iest,pu (q)
lowed in (d) , ∆Imax and ∆Vmax are the values of diinv,pu control actions of different converters in the microgrid and
Iest,pu
(d)
h (q) i the interaction among them is essential for a reliable VFRT
and dvinv,pu respectively corresponding to ∆ II (d) with operation. The same is discussed in the upcoming section.
max
(q)
Iest,pu
an initial condition of (d) =0. For different values of III. C ONTROL S TRATEGY FOR VOLTAGE FAULT
Iest,pu
R IDE -T HROUGH O PERATION OF A M ICROGRID
h (q) i
I
∆ I (d) , values of G along with the performance indices
max A microgrid test system along with the control strategy is
like settling time, peak overshoot, the steady-state ripple of
(q)
Iest,pu
presented in Fig. 5 where the equivalent circuit of Fig. 1 is
(d) are observed. The final value of G is decided based expanded. The microgrid is comprised of a DG and an energy
Iest,pu
(q)
Iest,pu
storage device with their respective converters interfaced with
on desired performance indices. The (d) obtained using the rest of the network at the PCC through a grid-connected
Iest,pu
the EVT algorithm shown in Fig. 4 is used to generate inverter and a DC crowbar [4]. The control strategy employed
current references of RCS-III given in Table I. As the inverter (d)
3 The Iest,pu
terminal voltage moves towards the maximum voltage point, (q)
Iest,pu
estimation is considered during high voltage fault condition
(d)
dvinv,pu
the oscillates near zero value (but never settles to to avoid a drastic change in current references when the microgrid is transiting
(q)
diinv,pu between VFRT operation and normal operation. This choice does not impact
zero) due to the forced oscillations introduced by the perturb the performance of the EVT algorithm.

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

DG unit DC-DC unidirectional DC-AC bi-directional converter

converter (grid-connected inverter) Rest of the network
Passive filters
PCC
DC bus

Crowbar

idg vdg
MPPT
PWM Local
algorithm
Ddg Load
DG unit controller vdc SPWM
Trip
iinv vinv
(q)
Energy Iest,pu
storage device DC-DC bi-directional pu Crowbar v*inv,pu (d)
conversion control Iest,pu
converter pu
dq to abc
vdc,pu γ conversion Adaptive
conversion E-PLL
+
dynamic iinv,pu vinv,pu
- (dq)* voltage
γ
* vinv,pu support abc to dq
vdc,pu scheme conversion
iess current
Inverter DC bus controller VFRT
Dess voltage controller (dq) characteristic
pu PWM (dq)* VFRT iinv,pu
conversion iinv,pu
(d)*
ipi,pu
iess,pu (dq)
max vinv,pu
Dead VFRT Iinv,pu
Current VFRT & Trip
zone detection
controller (q) (d)*
Iest,pu Real (d)* (q)*
iinv,pu (d)*
power
iinv,pu iinv,pu Reactive vinv,pu
*
vdc,pu (d)
power
*
Iest,pu controller
iess,pu controller VFRT VFRT Trip measured signals
max PCC voltage
Iinv,pu control signals
Energy storage DC (q)* controller
bus voltage controller Reference Current Signal (RCS) ipi,pu switching pulses
Energy storage controller Grid-connected Inverter controller power lines

Figure 5: Proposed controller for the VFRT operation of a microgrid test system

to enable the VFRT operation of a microgrid with adaptive the current reference (i∗ess,pu ) using the PI controller. The
DVS is depicted in this figure. The control strategy majorly current controller ensures that the measured pu current of the
encompasses the control aspects of controllers for the DG energy storage (iess,pu ) tracks this reference and generates
unit converter, energy storage converter, and grid-connected the corresponding duty cycle (Dess ) and thereby PWM pulses
inverter. for the DC-DC bidirectional energy storage converter. If the
1) DG Unit Controller: The DC-DC unidirectional con- excess power at the DC bus is beyond the inverter and energy
verter interfacing a DG unit is controlled using a maximum storage available capacity, the DC crowbar regulates the DC
power point tracking (MPPT) algorithm to tap the maximum bus at +5% by dissipating the excess power as heat energy
available power from the DG even during the VFRT operation. [21].
To implement this, the DG terminal voltage and current (vdg 3) Grid-connected Inverter Controller: Grid side inverter is
and idg ) are measured and passed to the MPPT controller for a DC-AC bi-directional converter receiving switching pulses
generating the duty cycle (Ddg ) and thereby PWM switching through sinusoidal PWM (SPWM) technique based on the
pulses for the DC-DC converter. proposed RCS during VFRT operation as shown in Fig. 5.
2) Energy Storage and Crowbar Controller: A The local variables i.e., three-phase voltages and currents at the
communication-less unified distributed control strategy inverter output filters (vinv and iinv ) are converted into per unit
[20] based on the DC bus signaling method is devised to values and fed to the controller. An enhanced PLL (E-PLL)
control the DC bus voltage and facilitate power management extracts the phase angle information (γ) of vinv which is used
among different devices interacting with the DC bus. In to calculate the dq-axis voltage and current components (i.e.,
(dq) (dq)
this work, the inverter is regulating the DC bus voltage up vinv,pu and iinv,pu ) using Park transformation [22]. Further,
to ±2.5% of 1 pu whereas the energy storage comes into vinv,pu is compared with the APC-II VFRT characteristic of
operation only when the DC bus voltage deviates by more the IEEE 1547:2018 standards for detecting the occurrence
∗
than ±2.5% from the nominal voltage (vdc,pu ) and regulate of VFRT condition (VFRT signal) and/or trip condition (Trip
it within ±5%. Referring to Fig. 5, the DC bus voltage signal) along with consecutive VFRT events [2]. During the
(vdc ) is measured and converted to pu value (vdc,pu ) and the steady-state operation (i.e, when VFRT=0 and Trip=0), the
(d)∗
corresponding voltage deviation is calculated. The dead-zone real current reference (iinv,pu ) of the inverter is generated
block ensures that voltage deviation only beyond ±2.5% of using the DC bus voltage control while the reactive current
∗ (q)∗
vdc,pu is fed to the DC bus voltage controller to generate reference (iinv,pu ) is generated by the d-axis PCC voltage

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

controller using respective PI controllers. The d- and q- axis

(dq) (dq)
voltages and currents (vinv,pu and iinv,pu ) are used in the
adaptive DVS scheme and the current controller to generate
(q)
Iest,pu
the (d) and track the current references respectively. During
Iest,pu
VFRT conditions on the network (VFRT=1) the appropriate
(d)∗ (q)∗
current references for the inverter (iinv,pu and iinv,pu ) based
on the proposed adaptive DVS scheme are generated by the
real and reactive power controller respectively. In the event
of a voltage disturbance beyond the VFRT characteristic, the
Trip=1 command is generated by the VFRT detection block
and the SPWM pulses to the inverter are interrupted.
The proposed control strategy with the adaptive DVS
scheme requires a DC bus as well as the appropriate energy
storage device connected to the DC bus in the grid-connected
microgrid. Therefore, the role of energy storage and its ca-
pacity requirement to achieve the desired VFRT operation is
analyzed in the next section. Figure 6: DC bus power imbalance variation for VFRT operation

IV. ROLE AND S IZING OF E NERGY S TORAGE
The role of energy storage in maintaining the DC bus voltage
of the microgrid is vital to enabling the proposed DVS scheme.
This leads to quantifying the power and energy rating of energy
storage for the VFRT operation of the microgrid with adaptive
DVS operation and accordingly evaluating the sufficiency of
the available energy storage. Variation in the PCC voltage
often affects the power transferred to the grid during constant
power operation (grid following control). This leads to a power
imbalance at the DC bus due to the difference between the
available DG power output and the power injected through
the inverter when the microgrid is administering the available
maximum power from the DG unit. The real power injected
through the inverter is given by the following equation
(d) (d)
Pinv,pu = vinv,pu × iinv,pu ≤ Pdg,pu
where Pdg,pu is the available power output from the DG
unit. However, as per the analysis carried out in section II,
within the inverter current capacity, both real and reactive
current should be accommodated to provide adaptive DVS
during VFRT operation depending on the network conditions.
Therefore, the ratio of d and q axis currents injected through
the inverter should adhere to (9) and the maximum current limit
of the inverter given in (10) for achieving the DVS with a safe
(d)
operation of the inverter. Using the expression for iinv,pu from
Table I in (15), the power imbalance (Pimb,pu ) occurring at
the DC bus of the microgrid during voltage variations is given
below where Pdg,pu − Pinv,pu is for low voltage condition and
Pdg,pu + Pinv,pu is for high voltage condition.
to maintain a stable DC bus voltage. Figure 6 displays the
power imbalance variation with different parameters used in
max (d)
(16). Iinv,pu =1.2 pu is taken as default value, the vinv,pu is
varied from 0.3pu to 1pu for low voltage fault condition and
(q)
Iest,pu
1pu to 1.2pu for high voltage fault condition and (d) is
Iest,pu
varied from 0 to 20 for variation in plots. The contour for
Pdg,pu = 0pu and 1pu corresponds to minimum and maximum
generation from DG unit respectively. A positive value of
Pimb,pu requires a charging operation by the energy storage
device and vice-versa. It is evident from Fig. 6 that the highest
value of Pimb,pu for discharging operation (i.e. -1.2pu) is
obtained with Pdg,pu = 0 pu and for charging operation (i.e.
2.44pu) is obtained with Pdg,pu = 1pu. Hence, it is evident
that the minimum and maximum power imbalance at the DC
bus that is considered for sizing the energy storage unit are
(15)
-1.20pu and 2.44pu respectively. To avoid over-sizing of the
energy storage, the user may consider the use of a DC crowbar
during a high voltage fault condition, thus limiting the power
imbalance to -1.2pu4 . Hence, the maximum power rating of
the energy storage can be decided based on Pimb,pu during
V F RT
low VFRT operation with Pdg,pu = 0pu. Let Pimb,pu be the
power imbalance at the DC bus when the VFRT characteristic
(d)
voltage is substituted in (16) for vinv,pu . The required power
rating of the energy storage device is then given by
V F RT


Pess,pu = sf × max |Pimb,pu | (17)
where sf =1.05 is the safety factor considered to include
the effect of losses involved in the power conversion stages.
4 The energy storage rating can be further reduced by limiting the provision

max (d) of the adaptive DVS to a subset of the fault voltage range and for a minimum
vinv,pu × Iinv,pu pre-fault DG power output condition i.e. for example, when vinv,pu is
(d)
Pimb,pu = Pdg,pu ∓ Pinv,pu = Pdg,pu ∓ s between 0.3pu to 0.65pu and when the Pdg,pu ≥0.5pu. This reduces the
  (q) 2
Iest,pu power imbalance at the DC bus to -0.28pu of the DG rating as per (16),
1+ (d) thereby reducing the power rating of the energy storage to 0.298pu as per
Iest,pu
(17). Correspondingly the energy rating is also reduced as per (18) due to a
(16) reduction in the ride-through duration and the power rating. Though this option
This short-term yet significant power imbalance at the DC is not considered in this work, the same is discussed here for the completeness
bus needs to be mitigated with the help of energy storage of this analysis.

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364
Further, (18) gives the energy exchanged by the energy storage
(in Ws) including the effect of the number of VFRT events
(NV F RT ).
Z tV F RT
Eess = NV F RT × Pess,pu × Pbase × dt
0
where Pbase is the base power used for the pu conversion
and tV F RT is the time in seconds of the VFRT characteristic.
Equations (17) and (18) determine the power rating and the
energy rating of the required energy storage device. This
analysis can be used as a reference to verify the sufficiency
of the existing energy storage device in a microgrid and
retrofitting (if required) with the suitable energy storage to
achieve VFRT operation under the adaptive DVS scheme. The
DC crowbar resistance value is decided as per [21] based
on the maximum excess power at the DC bus exceeding the
cumulative power rating of the inverter and the energy storage
device.
V. R EAL - TIME S IMULATION A NALYSIS
A grid-connected microgrid shown in Fig. 5 is tested with
solar PV as DG and supercapacitor (SC) as energy storage,
for the performance of the proposed control strategy through
simulation on an RTDS simulator using the RSCAD program-
ming interface. The sub-step environment of RSCAD is used
to model the microgrid and its associated elements with a 4µs
time-step whereas the controllers presented in section-III are
modelled using the main time-step blocks with 40µs time-
step. The high-frequency transients during the faults that are
captured by the electromagnetic transient (EMT) simulation
may be erroneously considered as a perturbation in the terminal
voltage of the microgrid and the adaptive DVS scheme tries to
(q)
counteract the same by varying the
Iest,pu
value [23]. A time
(d)
Iest,pu
delay equivalent to one fundamental cycle (20ms) is considered
for enabling the adaptive DVS scheme after the detection of
a VFRT event in this work to obviate the impact of transients
arising during faults. The system parameters are listed in Table
II. The base values considered for per unit conversion are
25kVA & 25kW for AC & DC power respectively, 400V for
AC voltage, 900V for DC voltage, and 50 Hz for frequency.
This simulation study considers only symmetrical faults as they
tend to produce the worst-case effect on the system compared
to the other type of faults. The SC is considered as the energy
storage device to cater the sharp power imbalances during the
VFRT operation. Sizing is based on the analysis presented in
section IV, and the nearest commercially available SC modules
are considered in this study. The maximum current rating
of the inverter is taken as 1.2pu. Throughout the section, a
positive value of real power is treated as a power fed to the
DC bus and vice-versa. Similarly, a positive value of reactive
power represents an injection of reactive power into the utility
grid and vice-versa. The rated PV generation is considered
(q)
throughout this analysis. The dimin is taken as 2% of iinv,pu
in this study. The time duration of each sampling instant (k)
is taken as 10ms in this work. Considering a fixed SCR of
© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
8 (representing medium strength
h network),
i the authors have
(q)
considered multiple values of ∆ II (d) between 0.05 and
max
0.2 and the corresponding range of G is obtained as 0.0375 and
(q)
Iest,pu
3.6 adhering to (14). Further, considering (d) in the range
Iest,pu
(18) of 0 to 2, G=1.5 that facilitates a settling time of 0.2s with
negligible overshoot and 1.5% steady state ripple is considered
in this work. The subsection A and B of this section consider
the test system shown in Fig. 5 where the rest of the network
is represented as an equivalent circuit with specifications listed
in Table-II. The CIGRE distribution test network is considered
in sub-section-C for the scalability test.
A. Performance of the Dynamic Voltage Support Scheme
The performance of the proposed control strategy is vali-
dated for low VFRT and high VFRT operation and multiple
fault scenarios in this subsection.
1) Low VFRT Operation: A fault voltage of 0.5pu of the
rated voltage is applied at 1s for a duration of 2s and the
PCC voltage is depicted in Fig. 7a for all three RCS discussed
in section II and the current ratio (CR) sweep scenario5 along
with the APC-II VFRT characteristic of IEEE 1547:2018 stan-
dard. The corresponding real and reactive power exchanged by
the microgrid is presented in Figs. 7b and 7c respectively. The
equivalent network seen by the microgrid neither requires a
purely real power nor purely reactive power exchange as per
the prevailing test conditions. However, only the real power of
-0.76pu and only the reactive power of 0.67pu are fed to the
network with RCS-I and RCS-II respectively as evident from
Figs. 7b and 7c. Hence, RCS-I and RCS-II have improved the
PCC voltage to 0.638pu (27.6% improvement compared to the
applied fault voltage) and 0.561pu (12.2%) respectively (refer
Fig. 7a). RCS-III facilitated a combination of real power (-
0.69pu) and reactive power (0.38pu) transfer with β=-28.8o
resulting in the DVS maintaining the PCC voltage at 0.658pu
(31.6%). The real and reactive power output of the microgrid
with RCS-III corresponds to the real and reactive power output
of the CR sweep scenario that has facilitated the available
maximum voltage of 0.658pu at the PCC. Therefore, the
microgrid is operated as an over-excited generator during the
(q)
Iest,pu
(q)
Iinv,pu
DVS with RCS-III using the (d) = (d) =0.55 estimated by
Iest,pu Iinv,pu
the adaptive DVS scheme in real-time.
Additionally, as per the VFRT characteristic shown in Fig.
7a, the microgrid inverter should trip when the PCC voltage
is below 0.65pu for a duration of more than 0.32s. It can
5 The current ratio sweep scenario involves an intentional variation of
(q) (q)
Iest,pu
. The
Iest,pu
is given 0 until 1.14s, linearly increased from 0 to
(d) (d)
Iest,pu Iest,pu
20 between 1.14s and 1.94s, maintained at 20 until 3s, reduced to zero at 3s
and maintained at 0 from 3s to 4s. This then translates to variable real and
reactive current references as per the current reference equations of RCS-III
mentioned in Table I resulting in a variable real and reactive power output
from the microgrid as shown in Figs. 7b and 7c respectively. This results
in an inverted-V characteristic for PCC voltage between 1.14s and 1.94s as
shown in Fig. 7a. The DVS with RCS-III should guarantee the peak voltage
(0.658pu) of the inverted-V curve obtained from the CR sweep scenario during
the VFRT operation.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

Table II: Technical specifications of the test system

System component Specifications
100 modules of 30.7V (MPP voltage), 8.15A
PV array
(MPP current); 25kW (MPP power)
Supercapacitor bank 12 units of 130F, 56V modules
DC-DC uni-directional
650V/900V, 25kW, 10kHz
converter
DC-DC bi-directional
672V/900V, 31.5kW, 10kHz
converter
DC-AC bi-directional
3-ph, 900V(DC)/400V(AC), 25kVA, 9.75kHz
converter
DC crowbar 3Ω, 1280Hz
Rest of the network 3-ph, 400V, 50Hz, SCR=8, X/R=0.5
Local load 3-ph, 400V, 50Hz, 101.98Ω, X/R=0.2

be observed that the DVS with RCS-I and II resulted in the

disconnection of the microgrid at 1.34s leading to a loss of (a) PCC voltage with zoomed version
voltage support to the network when it is required. However,
with the coordinated action of the proposed control strategy,
the adaptive DVS resulted in additional voltage support from
the microgrid which facilitated the microgrid in performing
successful low VFRT operation for a duration of 2s without
tripping. The power transferred to the network during RCS-
III is only 0.69pu. The remaining power at the DC bus i.e,
Pimb,pu =0.31pu is within the value of Pess,pu obtained from
(17) and is absorbed by the SC energy storage during the VFRT
operation.
(b) Real power from inverter
2) High VFRT Operation: A high voltage of 1.1pu is applied
at 1s for a duration of 1s and the corresponding response of
the test system is based on different RCS with PCC voltage,
the real and reactive power exchanged by the microgrid are
presented in Figs. 8a, 8b and 8c respectively. The CR sweep
(d)
Iest,pu
scenario involves an intentional variation of (q) from 0 to
Iest,pu
20 between 1.14s to 1.94s which translates to variable current
references from the inverter as per RCS-III. This leads to a
variable real and reactive power from the inverter that results
in a variable PCC voltage with a clearly defined minimum
voltage at 0.95pu for this test condition as shown in Fig. (c) Reactive power from inverter
8a. However, the PCC voltage with RCS-I and RCS-II settles
down at 0.96pu and 1.025pu respectively. The application of
RCS-III with only the EVT algorithm would have resulted in Figure 7: Response of the test system for low VFRT conditions with
a minimum PCC voltage of 0.95pu, yet, the adaptive DVS different RCS
scheme facilitates a PCC voltage of 1pu by abstaining from
(d)
updating the
Iest,pu
when the PCC voltage reaches 1pu at voltage disturbance sets6 , separated by at least 10s and may
(q)
Iest,pu prohibit doing so for further disturbance sets until next 60
(d)
Iest,pu minutes from the completion of the first disturbance set [2].
(q) =0.25. This facilitated a 9.1% reduction in the PCC
Iest,pu Multiple faults with variable fault voltages are created to
voltage compared to the applied fault voltage. The DC crowbar validate the performance of the proposed control strategy as
circuit in conjunction with the supercapacitor energy storage depicted in Fig. 9a.
has facilitated a stable DC voltage.
6 A disturbance set may contain single or multiple faults. Multiple faults are

3) Multiple Faults Scenario: Multiple faults usually arise
due to the fault-clearing mechanism in place and sometimes
due to the multiple faults themselves. The generating unit
adhering to the APC-II requirements of IEEE 1547:2018
standard must ride through a maximum of two consecutive
treated as a single disturbance set as long as the cumulative duration of all the
faults in this set does not exceed the maximum ride-through duration required
for the respective fault voltage i.e, as per the APC-II VFRT characteristic,
a 0.65pu fault voltage should be ride through for 3s. As long as the total
duration of multiple faults each of 0.65pu magnitude is less than 3s, they all
are treated as a single disturbance set and should be ride through.

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364
(a) PCC voltage with zoomed version
(b) Real power from inverter
(c) Reactive power from inverter
Figure 8: Response of the test system for high VFRT conditions with
different RCS
A fault with a voltage of 0.65pu is applied at 1s for a
duration of 1s followed by a fault at 2s with 0.7pu for a
duration of 1s as shown in Fig. 9a. Both faults are treated
as disturbance set-1 and are ride-through by the microgrid.
The improved PCC voltages for the 0.65pu fault voltage
condition are 0.778pu for RCS-I, 0.705pu for RCS-II and
0.796pu for RCS-III whereas for the fault at 2s with 0.7pu
fault voltage the improved PCC voltages are 0.828pu for RCS-
I, 0.755pu for RCS-II, and 0.846pu for RCS-III. A value of
0.55 is imposed as the test condition for the tan(δ + ζ) of the
equivalent network seen by the microgrid during the faults at
(q)
Iest,pu
1s and 2s. The (d) value estimated by the adaptive DVS
Iest,pu
© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
10
(a) PCC voltage
(q)
Iest,pu
(b) (d) value with RCS-III
Iest,pu
Figure 9: Microgrid parameters for multiple fault scenario
scheme shown in Fig. 9b is in line with the imposed test
conditions despite the varying fault voltages. The fault at 9s
with 0.65pu voltage for 1s, which is 6s after the disturbance
set-1 is treated as a separate disturbance set i.e, set-2. Since the
disturbance set-2 is within 10s duration of the completion of
the first disturbance set, the microgrid remains connected and
continues to work with RCS-I (used in the normal operation
of microgrid) and does not provide the maximum DVS for this
fault using RCS-III7 . Further, a fault with a voltage of 0.7pu is
applied at 16s for a duration of 3s with a tan(δ + ζ) value of
0.55 from 16s to 17s, 1.6 from 17s to 18s, and 2.1 from 18s
to 19s respectively8 . It is evident that the proposed RCS-III
facilitated the available maximum voltage of 0.846pu despite
the varying network conditions as the adaptive DVS scheme
(q)
Iest,pu
has accurately estimated the (d) pertaining to the prevailing
Iest,pu
network conditions and modified the real and reactive current
output from the inverter accordingly.
7 The microgrid can provide the adaptive DVS even during disturbance set-
2, yet, the same is not considered here to demonstrate the microgrid operation
in compliance to the IEEE 1547:2018 standard.
8 The test conditions at 16s are similar to the fault at 2s, whereas impedance
angle of rest of the network is changed from 26.56o to 58o at 17s and 58o to
63.44o at 18s. The phase angle of the voltage source is changed from -3.5o
to 40o at 18s keeping all other conditions constant.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

11

(a) PCC Phase voltages with zoomed version (b) Line currents with zoomed version (c) PCC and DC bus voltage

(q)
Iest,pu
(f) (d) value
(d) Real power of microgrid components (e) Reactive power from inverter Iest,pu

Figure 10: Microgrid parameters for low VFRT operation with RCS-III

B. Performance of the Dynamic Voltage Support Scheme on
CIGRE Distribution Test Network
This subsection aims to validate the scalability of the
proposed control strategy and therefore the simulation results
corresponding to the operation of the microgrid with only
RCS-III are presented using the three-phase four-wire resi-
dential distribution test feeder of the European LV benchmark
network proposed by CIGRE as the rest of the network in Fig.
1 for the VFRT study [24]. The microgrid is connected at bus
10 of the CIGRE test network.
1) Low VFRT Operation: The low VFRT operation of the
microgrid with RCS-III is presented in Fig 10. A 3-ϕ fault
is applied at bus 1 of the test network at 1s for a duration
of 2s resulting in a low voltage condition at the PCC with a
fault voltage of 0.615pu. On the onset of low voltage fault, the
inverter over-current limit of 1.2pu is utilized and the inverter
(q)
Iest,pu
starts injecting real and reactive current based on (d)
Iest,pu
Figs. 10b and 10f). Accordingly, the real and reactive power
output of the inverter is fed to the network as shown in
Figs. 10d and 10e respectively. Additionally, the real power
exchanged by the solar PV array and the energy storage unit is
depicted in Fig. 10d. The power output from the energy storage
is adjusted as per the real power variation of the inverter to
maintain the DC bus voltage within limits of ±1.05pu (refer
Fig. 10c) and thereby facilitate a stable and reliable VFRT
operation without compromising the MPPT operation of the
PV array. The voltage at the PCC is improved to 0.698pu
from the applied fault voltage of 0.615pu resulting in a 13.5%
betterment under the VFRT operation of the microgrid with
the proposed control strategy (refer Figs 10a and 10c).
2) High VFRT Operation: A high voltage condition is
applied in the 20kV medium voltage source of the CIGRE test
network at 1s for a duration of 1s resulting in an overvoltage of
1.2pu at the PCC. The response of the microgrid with the RCS-
III is presented in Fig. 11. The over-current limit of the inverter
is utilized to prioritize the absorption of both real and reactive
current to minimize the overvoltage at the PCC. The real and
reactive power exchange through the microgrid is depicted in
Figs. 11d and 11e respectively. The power imbalance arising
at the DC bus due to the MPPT operation of the PV array and
the curtailment of real power through the inverter is absorbed
by the energy storage and DC crowbar to facilitate a stable DC
bus voltage (refer Fig. 11d). The PCC voltage is maintained at
1.12 pu against the applied fault voltage of 1.2pu with RCS-III
(d)
using
Iest,pu
given in Fig. 11f resulting in a 6.6% reduction
(q)
Iest,pu
(refer with appropriate support from the DC crowbar and the energy
storage device (refer Figs. 11a, 11c and 11d).
VI. C ONCLUSION
VFRT problems are addressed in the available literature and
their methods are based on only real or only reactive current
prioritization or a combination of both without considering the
dynamic network conditions during the network faults leading
to severe voltage variations. A control strategy is proposed in
this work by leveraging the support from the energy storage
system and its performance is evaluated for various operating

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

12

(a) PCC Phase voltages with zoomed version (b) Line currents with zoomed version (c) PCC and DC bus voltage

(d)
Iest,pu
(f) (q) value
(d) Real power of microgrid components (e) Reactive power from inverter Iest,pu

Figure 11: Microgrid parameters for high VFRT operation with RCS-III

scenarios like low VFRT, high VFRT, and multiple faults with
variable fault voltages. The proposed DVS method adaptively
dictates the real and reactive current output of the microgrid
based on the dynamic conditions arising during the VFRT
operation, thus ensuring the best possible DVS. A microgrid
performing high and low VFRT operation with the proposed
control strategy has shown the ability to achieve adaptive
voltage support to unforeseen fault conditions on the utility
grid, ensure the safe operation of the inverter by adhering
to the maximum current limit, and enhance VFRT capability
of the utility grid by accommodating more severe faults. The
sizing methodology for a required power rating of the storage
device presented in this work acts as a reference to retrofitting
the available energy storage in a microgrid for low and high
VFRT operation. The scalability of the adaptive DVS scheme
is also tested and verified using the CIGRE distribution test
network. A possible future work is to analyze the operation of
the microgrid for unbalanced fault conditions and propose a
control strategy for the adaptive DVS during VFRT operation
using both positive and negative sequence components of
voltage and currents.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful to the authorities of the Indian
Institute of Technology Kharagpur for allowing to submit this
paper. Financial support from DST, Govt. of India sponsored
research project “UK India Clean Energy Research Institute”
is acknowledged for successful completion of this work.
R EFERENCES
[1] B. Enayati, “Impact of IEEE 1547 standard on smart inverters,” tech.
rep., Industry Technical Support Leadership Committee (ITSLC), 2018.
[2] IEEE, “IEEE standard for interconnection and interoperability of
distributed energy resources with associated electric power systems
interfaces,” IEEE Std 1547-2018 (Revision of IEEE Std 1547-2003),
pp. 1–138, 2018.
[3] A. Camacho, M. Castilla, J. Miret, L. G. de Vicuña, and R. Guzman,
“Positive and negative sequence control strategies to maximize the
voltage support in resistive–inductive grids during grid faults,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 5362–5373, 2018.
[4] M. Mirhosseini, J. Pou, and V. G. Agelidis, “Single- and two-stage
inverter-based grid-connected photovoltaic power plants with ride-
through capability under grid faults,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable
Energy, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1150–1159, 2015.
[5] G. Lammert, D. Premm, L. D. P. Ospina, J. C. Boemer, M. Braun,
and T. Van Cutsem, “Control of photovoltaic systems for enhanced
short-term voltage stability and recovery,” IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 243–254, 2019.
[6] M. J. Morshed and A. Fekih, “A novel fault ride through scheme
for hybrid wind/pv power generation systems,” IEEE Transactions on
Sustainable Energy, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 2427–2436, 2020.
[7] P. Mishra, A. Pradhan, and P. Bajpai, “Voltage control of pv inverter
connected to unbalanced distribution system,” IET Renewable Power
Generation, vol. 13, 2019.
[8] M. Islam, M. Nadarajah, and M. J. Hossain, “Short-term voltage
stability enhancement in residential grid with high penetration of rooftop
pv units,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 10, no. 4,
pp. 2211–2222, 2019.
[9] H. Khan, S. J. Chacko, B. G. Fernandes, and A. Kulkarni, “Reliable
and effective ride-through controller operation for smart pv systems
connected to lv distribution grid under abnormal voltages,” IEEE

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364
Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics, vol. 8,
no. 3, pp. 2371–2384, 2020.
[10] M. Garnica, L. G. de Vicuña, J. Miret, M. Castilla, and R. Guzmán,
“Optimal voltage-support control for distributed generation inverters in
rl grid-faulty networks,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 67, no. 10, pp. 8405–8415, 2020.
[11] T. Roinila, T. Messo, and E. Santi, “Mimo-identification techniques for
rapid impedance-based stability assessment of three-phase systems in
dq domain,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 33, no. 5,
pp. 4015–4022, 2018.
[12] T. Roinila, M. Vilkko, and J. Sun, “Broadband methods for online grid
impedance measurement,” in 2013 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress
and Exposition, pp. 3003–3010, 2013.
[13] A. Sandali and A. Cheriti, “New adapted forms of p-v optimal slope
mppt for a better grid connected pv system integration,” in IEEE Inter-
national Conference on Industrial Technology, Toronto, ON, pp. 446–
451, 2017.
[14] J. Han, W. Jia, Y. Wang, L. Zhou, H. Hu, and Y. Ren, “An optimized
strategy of switching crowbar improve lvrt of dfig based on rtds,”
in 2020 IEEE Sustainable Power and Energy Conference (iSPEC),
pp. 775–780, 2020.
[15] M. Y. Worku and M. A. Abido, “Grid-connected pv array with su-
percapacitor energy storage system for fault ride through,” in IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), pp. 2901–
2906, March 2015.
[16] Y. Yang, P. Enjeti, F. Blaabjerg, and H. Wang, “Wide-scale adoption
of photovoltaic energy: Grid code modifications are explored in the
distribution grid,” IEEE Industry Applications Magazine, vol. 21, no. 5,
pp. 21–31, 2015.
[17] C. K. Das et. al., “Overview of energy storage systems in distribution
networks: Placement, sizing, operation, and power quality,” Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 91, pp. 272–286, Apr.
2018.
[18] A. K. Abdelsalam, A. M. Massoud, S. Ahmed, and P. N. Enjeti,
“High-performance adaptive perturb and observe mppt technique for
photovoltaic-based microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electron-
ics, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1010–1021, 2011.
[19] A. Pandey, N. Dasgupta, and A. K. Mukerjee, “High-performance
algorithms for drift avoidance and fast tracking in solar mppt system,”
IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 681–689,
2008.
[20] B. R. Naidu, S. Jose, D. Singh, and P. Bajpai, “A unified distributed
control strategy for dc microgrid with hybrid energy storage devices,” in
2018 20th National Power Systems Conference (NPSC), pp. 1–6, 2018.
[21] B. R. Naidu and P. Bajpai, “Voltage fault ride-through operation of solar
pv generation,” in Fundamentals and Innovations in Solar Energy (S. N.
Singh, P. Tiwari, and S. Tiwari, eds.), ch. 19, pp. 467–497, Springer
Singapore, 2021.
[22] M. Karimi-Ghartema, Enhanced Phase-Locked Loop, pp. 15–45. Wiley-
IEEE Press, 2014.
[23] L. Steinhaeuser, M. Coumont, S. Weck, and J. Hanson, “Comparison
of rms and emt models of converter-interfaced distributed generation
units regarding analysis of short-term voltage stability,” in NEIS 2019;
Conference on Sustainable Energy Supply and Energy Storage Systems,
pp. 1–6, 2019.
[24] B. R. Naidu, P. Bajpai, and C. Chakraborty, “Energy storage unit for
dynamic voltage support in distribution networks,” in 2021 9th IEEE
International Conference on Power Systems (ICPS), pp. 1–6, 2021.
© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
13
Bonu Ramesh Naidu (S’17-M’22) received his
B.Tech degree in Electrical & Electronics Engineer-
ing from JNTU Kakinada, India, and M.Tech degree
in Power & Energy Systems specialization from NIT
Meghalaya, India in 2013 and 2017 respectively. He
is currently a PhD student with the Department of
Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technol-
ogy Kharagpur, India. His current research interests
include self-healing distribution networks and 100%
renewable energy-integrated power systems.
Prabodh Bajpai (Senior Member, IEEE) received
B.E. degree in electrical engineering from the Uni-
versity of Roorkee (now IIT Roorkee), Roorkee,
India, the M.Tech. degree in energy studies from
the Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi,
India, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
from the Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur,
Kanpur, India, in 1997, 2001, and 2008, respectively.
He is currently an Associate Professor with the De-
partment of Electrical Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, India. His re-
search interests include power system restructuring, renewable energy systems,
and power system optimization. He was awarded the BASE Fellowship from
DST, MHRD, India to work at the University of Washington, USA during
2015.
Chandan Chakraborty (S’92-M’97-SM’01-F’15)
received B.E and M.E degrees in Electrical Engi-
neering from Jadavpur University in 1987 and 1989
respectively and Ph.D degrees from Indian Institute
of Technology Kharagpur and Mie University, Japan
in 1997 and 2000 respectively. Presently, he is a
professor in the Department of Electrical Engineer-
ing, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur. His
research interest includes power converters, motor
drives, electric vehicles and renewable energy. Dr.
Chakraborty was awarded the JSPS Fellowship to
work at the University of Tokyo during 2000-2002. He has received the IEEE
Bimal Bose Energy Systems Award in 2019. He has regularly contributed
to IES conferences such as IECON, ISIE and ICIT as technical program
chair/track chair. He is the Founding Editor-in-Chief of IE Technology News
(ITeN), a web-only publication for the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society.
He has served as a Co-EIC of IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics
during 2018-19. He is appointed as the Founding Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE
Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Industrial Electronics (JESTIE).
He is a Fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineering (INAE).
Muli Malakondaiah received the Bachelors degree
from J.N.T.U. Hyderabad, India and a Master’s de-
gree in power systems specialization from SVNIT
Surat, India in 2012 and 2016 respectively. He is
presently a Ph.D. student in the Department of Elec-
trical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology
Madras, Chennai, India. His current research inter-
ests include Renewable energy Technologies, Grid
connected Converters, Energy management in is-
landed microgrids, Grid compliance studies, and
fault detection methods in microgrids.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3231364

14

B. Kalyan Kumar (M ’07) received his Bachelor of

Technology degree from J.N.T.U. Hyderabad, India,
in 2001. He received Master of Technology and
PhD degrees from IIT Kanpur, India, in 2003 and
2007, respectively. He is at present a Professor in the
Department of Electrical Engineering, IIT Madras.
His areas of interest include power system dynam-
ics, Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS),
restructured power systems and renewable power
generation.

© 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Institute of Technology. Downloaded on December 29,2022 at 06:23:47 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.