IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
Online Grid Impedance Estimation-Based Adaptive
Control of Virtual Synchronous Generators
Considering Strong and Weak Grid Conditions
Nabil Mohammed, Member, IEEE, Mohammad Hasan Ravanji, Member, IEEE, Weihua Zhou, Member, IEEE, and
Behrooz Bahrani, Senior Member, IEEE
Abstract—The conventional virtual synchronous generator
(VSG) is typically designed to meet certain operational and con-
trol requirements in the islanded mode. However, once the VSG
is switched to grid-connected mode (GCM), the robust operation
cannot be guaranteed under different grid conditions. It can lead
to poor dynamic performance, especially in strong grids, such as
significant oscillation, long settling time, and large overshoot. To
improve the VSG performance in the GCM, this article first
analyzes in depth the inherent coupling between the active and
reactive power and its dependence on grid conditions, such as the
short circuit ratio and the grid impedance ratio. Subsequently,
an adaptive VSG (AVSG) control strategy based on online grid
impedance estimation is proposed to ensure robust operation of
the VSG considering both strong and weak grid conditions. This
technique allows the operator to specify the desired settling time
of the output power and damping ratio. To estimate the grid
impedance in real time without additional hardware and reduce
the associated impacts on power quality, an online event-based
grid impedance estimation algorithm is embedded in the control
loop of the AVSG. The simulation and experimental results
indicate that, compared with the conventional fixed-parameters-
based controller design method, the AVSG exhibits desired
performance such as no oscillation, specified time duration for
the settling time, and minimal overshoot regardless of the grid
conditions.
Index Terms—Adaptive control, online grid impedance estima-
tion, stability, strong grid, VSG, weak grid.
I. I NTRODUCTION
I N recent years, the deployment of renewable energy farms
has accelerated worldwide due to their declining costs and
environmental issues associated with fossil fuels [1]. Unlike
conventional synchronous generator-interfaced hydraulic and
thermal power plants, these renewable energy resources are
mainly connected to the utility grid via highly controllable,
flexible, and efficient power electronic converters [2]. Despite
these remarkable advantages, these converters currently in
service rely mainly on phase-locked loops (PLLs) for grid
synchronization to inject a specified power or current com-
mand that may induce control interaction-related instability
phenomena or limit the maximum power transfer capability
This work has been supported by the Monash Grid Innovation Hub and
the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) under the Advancing
Renewable Program (Grant No.: 2020/ARP007) (Corresponding author:
Nabil Mohammed).
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Systems Engineering, Monash University, 3800 Victoria, Australia (e-
mail: nabil.mohammed@ieee.org; mohammad.ravanji@monash.edu; wei-
hua.zhou@monash.edu; behrooz.bahrani@monash.edu).
1
under weak grid conditions [3]–[6]. Therefore, it is desirable
to eliminate the need for PLLs in these converter interfaces,
leading to increasing research interests both in academia and
industry for the emerging PLL-less grid-forming technology
[7].
Various kinds of grid-forming control strategies have been
developed in the literature, e.g., droop control, power syn-
chronization control, virtual synchronous generator (VSG),
synchronverter, matching control, and virtual oscillator control
[8]. Among them, the VSG is regarded a promising key
technology for achieving a 100% inverter-interfaced renew-
able grid, as it enables these power electronic converters to
mimic both the steady-state and transient-state characteristics
of conventional synchronous generators. The VSG not only
accurately tracks the power command, but also provides inertia
and damping to the utility grid [9].
The VSG can operate in the islanded mode (IM) and in the
grid-connected mode (GCM). On the one hand, the main task
of the VSG in the IM is to form the microgrid voltage and
frequency. On the other hand, the main task of the VSG in the
GCM is to inject the active power specified by its reference
value, while the terminal voltage and frequency are regulated
by the utility grid [10]. Conventional grid-following control
strategies cannot provide adequate inertia support for the grid
under these circumstances, which may impose the risk of
instability for renewable-energy-rich power systems [11]. The
voltage, frequency, and inertia support in these grid-connected
regions using the grid-forming concept is thus in great need.
Although many research studies have been conducted to
improve the VSG control performance, there are still some
challenges under investigation [9]. Among them, the coupling
between the active and reactive power output that can lead
to degradation of the stability and dynamic performance of
the power system has drawn increasing research attention
[12]. Furthermore, severe power coupling results in transient
oscillations and even unstable operation [13]. The decoupling
between the active and reactive power is only satisfied in
high- or medium-voltage grids where the grid impedance ratio
Xg /Rg is large enough such that the line impedance could be
regarded as mainly inductive [14], [15]. However, the power
coupling exists in a low-voltage grid due to the small Xg /Rg
ratio of line impedance, i.e., any change of the active power
output will affect the reactive power output and vice versa
[11].
Considering the above-mentioned issues related to the cou-
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
pling between the active and reactive power output, such as the
step responses deteriorate (e.g., overshoot, settling time, and
oscillations) under strong grid conditions, it is important to an-
alyze the negative impacts of the grid impedance on the power
coupling of grid-forming inverters. However, most of the
control strategies in the literature that address power coupling
issues focus on droop-based grid-forming inverters. These
techniques include virtual inductance [16], virtual impedance
[17], adaptive virtual impedance [18], adaptive droop control
[19], and various improved droop control strategies [20]. Few
studies focus on addressing the power coupling issues in
VSG-based grid-forming inverters, especially in the GCM. In
[21], the power equations considering a resistive-inductive grid
impedance are linearized at a specific operating point. Then,
a power decoupling method based on compensating for the
coupling components of the power equations is presented. In
[13], to assess the power coupling characteristics, a unified
dynamic power coupling model is presented. In [11], the
limitation of using only virtual inductance to decouple the
power flow is investigated. Then, a q-axis voltage-drop-based
power decoupling control is proposed. Furthermore, the effects
of adopting the virtual inductance on power decoupling are
assessed in detail in [22]. In [10], a generalized control is
presented to meet the operational requirements in both the
GCM and IM. Therefore, in the GCM, the oscillations are sup-
pressed, and the settling time of the output power is reduced.
In [23], a compensated VSG control scheme is proposed to
accurately follow the power reference commands in the GCM.
Compared with the conventional VSG, the compensated VSG
results in lower overshoots and shorter settling times in step
responses in both strong and weak grids.
Despite the above efforts to eliminate the power decoupling
issue in VSG-based grid-forming inverters, several shortcom-
ings remain to be resolved. First, the control design proposed
based on linearization and decoupling, e.g., in [21], is valid
and accurate only for a specific linearized operating point.
Second, the proposed control designs, e.g., in [24], assume
that the grid impedance is purely inductive, which is not the
case in weak and low-voltage grids. In [23], the information of
the grid inductance is required for tuning the proposed VSG,
and it is assumed to be known. Again, the grid impedance
is assumed to be inductive. Hence, the pre-calculated values
for the VSG parameters are neither based on the real value of
the grid inductance nor take into account the grid resistance
value. Third, no comprehensive study reveals the performance
of the VSG in the GCM considering operating scenarios with
different values of the short circuit ratio (SCR), different grid
impedance ratios Xg /Rg , and grid impedance variations with
the same Xg /Rg ratio.
Finally, as reviewed above, the equivalent grid impedance
seen at the point of common coupling (PCC) affects the op-
eration of the VSG. Therefore, assuming that the information
about the impedance of the grid impedance is known during
the control design stage is not an accurate assumption since
the grid impedance is a parameter varying over time [25].
One possible and cost-effective solution is to enable the VSG
to estimate the grid impedance in real-time. Previous studies
investigate this feature by enabling grid-following inverters to
2
estimate the grid impedance [26], [27]. Different estimation
algorithms are used for grid impedance estimation using grid-
connected inverters, including extended Kalman filter [28],
recursive least squares [29], system identification [30], power
variations [26], single-frequency injection techniques [31],
PRBS [32], and pulse injection [25], [33]. However, the
literature has not yet proposed the implementation of such
estimation algorithms into the control loop of the VSG-based
inverters, which brings new considerations such as the trade-
offs between the accuracy, disturbance, and estimation speed.
This paper initially presents a comprehensive study to reveal
the negative impacts of different grid impedance conditions,
i.e., different SCRs, different Xg /Rg ratios, and different grid
impedance amplitudes, on the step response (oscillation, high
overshoot, and long settling time) of VSG-based inverters.
Then, an adaptive VSG (AVSG) control strategy is proposed
to eliminate these negative impacts of the grid impedance on
the power coupling between the active and reactive power
loops regardless of the grid conditions. The advantages of the
proposed control are summarized as follows:
1) It relies on the online estimation of the grid equivalent
model, i.e., grid resistance and inductance, in order to
adaptively tune the VSG parameters. Hence, it can stably
operate in both weak and strong grids.
2) To avoid practical complications caused by using net-
work analyzers for impedance estimation purposes, an
online event-based active grid impedance estimation
(GIE) technique is embedded into the control of the
AVSG. It only utilizes the available PCC voltage and
current measurements to accurately estimate the grid
impedance components.
3) It ensures complete decoupling and control of the active
and reactive powers with the same desired dynamic
performance, such as no oscillation, specified settling
time, and minimal overshoot.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section II
provides a comprehensive review of the conventional VSG,
including the control structure, its performance in the IM and
in the GCM, and a summary of the remaining challenges
related to grid parameters (e.g., SCR and X/R ratios) that hin-
der the accurate control of VSG-based inverters in the GCM.
Section III describes the proposed AVSG. Section IV presents
the simulation and experimental results. Finally, Section V
draws conclusions.
II. C ONTROL OF THE C ONVENTIONAL VSG AND ITS
C HALLENGES
A. Control Structure of the Conventional VSG
Fig. 1 shows the topology and control diagram of a con-
ventional VSG-based grid-forming inverter. The inverter is
interfaced to the grid at the PCC via an LC filter (with
an inductance Lf , an equivalent series resistance Rf , and a
capacitance Cf ) to the grid or load (not shown in the figure).
The utility grid is modelled using the Thevenin equivalent
circuit that consists of the grid voltage source (Vg ) and the
grid impedance (Zg = Rg + sLg ).
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 3

Rf Lf PCC Zg vg In addition, the parameter Dp of the VSG is designed based

BESS VSI on
1
Dp = , (4)
mp
Cf
vdc Gate drives iinv where
ipcc vpcc iinv 2π(fmax − fmin )
mp = (5)
PWM t abc dq 2 × Pmax

vdq, pcc
idq, pcc
idq, pcc vdq, pcc idq, inv is the frequency droop coefficient considering that the VSG is
abc
dq t P Control Dp capable of supplying and absorbing active power, i.e., the VSG

Power calculation
vdc t 1 1 1 Ppcc interfaces large-scale battery storage systems where batteries
Reference generator

Inner idq, inv s s J 0 Pref can be charged and discharged [36]. fmax and fmin are the
voltage & ref maximum and minimum frequency deviations, respectively,
vdq, pcc
current 1
v E ref K iq allowed in the IM. In addition, Pmax is the maximum active
controllers dq, ref s Qpcc power that can be supplied by the VSG.
K pq Qref Based on (2) and (3), J can be calculated as
Q Control
Dp
Fig. 1: Control structure of a conventional VSG-based grid-forming inverter. J = TV SG . (6)
ω0
For the conventional VSG shown in Fig. 1 and by considering
Conventionally, fixed values are assigned to the virtual the circuit and VSG parameters listed in Table I, Dp is
damping Dp and the virtual inertia J at the design stage by calculated as Dp = 1.273×106 W/Hz based on (4) and (5).
considering the operational requirements in the IM. However, Then, for an initial RoCoF as 1 Hz/s (i.e., TV SG = 1 s),
6
in the GCM, although the designed fixed values for the J can be calculated as J = 1 × 1.273×10314.16 = 4052 kg·m2
VSG parameters can still perform reasonably well in weak based on (6).
grids, they could lead to a poor transient response with high Fig. 2 presents the performance of the VSG in the IM. In
overshoot and long-time oscillations in strong grids that have this figure, to verify the desired initial RoCoF requirement
relatively small grid impedances [8]. Therefore, the perfor- in the IM, the VSG system shown in Fig. 1 considering the
mance of the VSGs is highly dependent on the grid conditions, parameters listed in Table I is simulated in MATLAB/Simulink
as will be shown in subsection II-C. where the VSG is connected to a load instead of the grid.
Fig. 2 shows the obtained response to a step-change of the
load active power from 0 to 4 MW at t =0 s, indicating that
B. Control of the Conventional VSG in the IM the initial RoCoF at the PCC is equal to ∆ω π
∆t = 1 = π rad/s
2

In the IM, the VSG is expected to provide frequency support or 0.5 Hz/s that is the same as the designed value shown in
when the load changes. Therefore, the inertia and damping (3). Note that the designed RoCoF is equal to 1 Hz/s for the
parameters of the VSG are designed to meet the rate of change change of the active power from -4 MW to 4 MW.
of frequency (RoCoF) requirements. In Fig. 1, by neglecting It is worth mentioning that the open-loop transfer function
the line losses, the small-signal transfer function from the load of the VSG Gp (s) is given in (7)
variation ∆Pload to the angular frequency variation ∆ω can δ 1
be derived as Gp (s) = = , (7)
∆Pload s(Jω0 s + Dp )
∆ω 1
=− , (1) where δ is the output voltage angle of the VSG operating in
∆Pload Jω0 s + Dp the islanded mode.
where ω0 , Dp , and J are the grid nominal angular frequency, Furthermore, (1) presents the open-loop transfer function
the damping coefficient, and the inertia coefficient of the VSG, ∆ω/∆Pload . It can be seen that ∆ω/∆Pload is a first-order
respectively. Eq. (1) can be rearranged as system that has a real negative pole. Compared to the droop
∆ω 1 1 control with a filter, the pole of ∆ω/∆Pload for the VSG is
=− Jω0
. (2) much closer to the imaginary axis, which contributes to the
∆Pload Dp Dp s +1
slower dynamic response of the VSG upon changes in the
Jω0 output power [10].
Assuming that TVSG = Dp is the time constant of the VSG,
(2) can be rewritten as The Q-V droop coefficient Kpq is calculated as
1 1 (Vmax − Vmin )
∆ω = − ∆Pload . (3) Kpq = , (8)
Dp TVSG s + 1 2Qmax
TVSG is related to the desired initial RoCoF. The RoCoF where Vmax and Vmax are the allowed maximum and minimum
requirement varies in different countries. For example, the voltage deviations, respectively. These parameters are specified
RoCoF requirement in Ireland is 0.5 Hz/s [34]. In Australia, by the grid code [37]. In addition, Qmax is the maximum
the Australian National Electricity Rules cite a minimum reactive power that can be supplied by the VSG. Number
access standard of 1 Hz/s [35], which is used in this paper. 2 in the denominator indicates that the VSG is capable of
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 4

and
0 3
ROCOF= 0.5 Hz/s Qpcc = [Xg (Vi2 − Vi Vj cosθij ) − Rg Vi Vj sinθij ],
Rg2 + Xg2
( rad/s)

-2 (10)
respectively, where Vi and Vj are the RMS values of the grid
-4
voltages at the PCC and the grid-side (AC bus), respectively.
Additionally, Rg and Xg represent the grid resistance and
-6
inductance, respectively. Please note that δ in (7) represents
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 the output voltage angle of the VSG operating in the islanded
Time (s) mode while θij in (9) and (10) is the phase angle difference
Fig. 2: VSG performance in the IM: a step response of the ∆ω upon a 4 MW between Vi and Vj when the VSG is operated in GC mode.
load power changes. To study the dynamic performance of the VSG, the small-
signal model of (9) and (10) is established as
TABLE I: Parameters of the study system.     
∆Ppcc K11 K12 ∆θij
Quantity Value Unit Description = , (11)
Grid parameters ∆Qpcc K21 K22 ∆Vi
vg 690 V Grid voltage (L-L)
f 50 Hz Nominal frequency where K11 , K22 , K21 , and K22 are related to a specific
Grid parameters (Rg , Xg ) used for the comparison study: Section II-C
Rg , Lg 0.63, 20 mΩ, µH Strong grid with SCR = 15.0, Xg /Rg =10
operating point (θij0 , Vi0 ), shown as
Rg , Lg 2, 19 mΩ, µH Strong grid with SCR=15.0, Xg /Rg =3
3

Rg , Lg 4.5, 14.3 mΩ, µH Strong grid with SCR=15.0, Xg /Rg =1
Rg , Lg 10, 95.8 mΩ, µH Weak grid with SCR=3.0, Xg /Rg =3
 K11 = 2 [Rg Vi0 Vj sinθij0 + Xg Vi0 Vj cosθij0 ]
Rg + Xg2


Rg , Lg 22.4, 71.4 mΩ, µH Weak grid with SCR=3.0, Xg /Rg =1



Rg , Lg 25, 239.6 mΩ, µH Weak grid with SCR=1.2, Xg /Rg =3 3


K12 = R2 + X 2 [Rg (2Vi0 − Vj cosθij0 ) + Xg Vj sinθij0 ]
Rg , Lg 56, 178.6 mΩ, µH Weak grid with SCR=1.2, Xg /Rg =1



Grid parameters (Rg , Xg ) used for the simulation study: Section IV-A g g
Rg , Lg 1.68, 37.5 mΩ, µH Strong grid with SCR=8.0, Xg /Rg =7.0
Rg , Lg 2.3, 37.1 mΩ, µH Strong grid with SCR=8.0, Xg /Rg =5.0 3
K21 = 2 [Xg Vi0 Vj sinθij0 − Rg Vi0 Vj cosθij0 ]


Rg , Lg 8.9, 200 mΩ, µH Weak grid with SCR=1.5, Xg /Rg =7
Rg + Xg2


Rg , Lg 20, 191.6 mΩ, µH Weak grid with SCR=1.5, Xg /Rg =3


Rg , Lg 44.9, 142.8 mΩ, µH Weak grid with SCR=1.5, Xg /Rg =1


 3
Inverter parameters K22 = 2 [Xg (2Vi0 − Vj cosθij0 ) − Rg Vj sinθij0 ],


Smax 5.0 MVA Inverter rated power Rg + Xg2
Pmax 4.0 MW Inverter rated active power
Qmax 3.0 MVar Inverter rated reactive power
(12)
vdc 3000 V DC Bus voltage where 0 denotes the steady-state operating point, Vi0 is the
fsw 5 kHz Inverter PWM carrier fequency
Lf 95 µH Filter inductance steady-state RMS value of the PCC line-to-ground voltage,
Rf
Cf
0.01
1
Ω
mF
Filter resistance
Filter capacitance
and θij0 is the power angle at the steady-state point.
Fixed parameters for the conventional VSG Fig. 3 shows the small-signal model of the VSG connecting
Dp 1.273 × 106 W/Hz Damping coefficient
J 4052 kg.m2 Inertia coefficient
to a resistive-inductive grid. It can be observed that this model
Kpq 1.5× 10−5 VAR/V Proportional gain of reactive power controller consists of two main parts: Power Control and Power Flow.
Kiq 1× 10−3 1/s Integral gain of reactive power controller
The Power Control represents the small-signal model of the
standard VSG, and the Power Flow represents the small-signal
model of the grid in which both the grid resistance and grid
supplying and absorbing reactive power. In the GCM, it is inductance are considered resulting in cross-coupling terms
recommended to add an integral term Kiq to the reactive power (K12 and K21 ). As shown in Fig. 3, the active and reactive
controller Kpq in order to track the reactive power reference power are coupled via the power angle and voltage magnitude,
with zero steady-state error [19]. Therefore, this paper uses a as presented in (9)-(12). In addition, the grid/line impedance
PI controller for the reactive power control channel. (i.e., Rg and Xg ) has a significant impact on both the
coupling and direct-through terms. Therefore, the independent
control of active and reactive power is challenging in resistive-
C. Control of the Conventional VSG in the GCM inductive grids due to the inherent coupling between the active
and reactive power [11], [13].
In the GCM, the main control objective of the VSG is to 2) The VSG Performance in the GCM: In Section II-B,
regulate its output active and reactive power to the desired the VSG parameters are designed based on the rated power
reference commands. To further investigate the performance of and the RoCoF requirement in the IM. In this section, the
the VSG in the GCM and how the grid impedance parameters VSG performance with the same parameters listed in Table I
affect its performance, a small-signal model that considers the is tested in the GCM to illustrate the shortcomings if the same
inherent power flow coupling is derived in this subsection, VSG parameters are used in the GCM.
based on which the stability analysis is further investigated. Three test cases are conducted. First, the performance of
1) Power Flow Analysis and Small-Signal Modeling of the the VSG is tested against the grid strength. In this test, the
VSG in the GCM: Considering Fig. 1, the active and reactive SCR indicator is adopted, which is a widely used index in the
power injected by the VSG into the grid can be calculated as existing literature for system strength studies. In summary,
3 SCR defines the ratio of the short-circuit capacity at the
Ppcc = [Rg (Vi2 −Vi Vj cosθij )+Xg Vi Vj sinθij ], (9) PCC to the rated capacity of the grid-connected inverter, i.e.,
Rg2 + Xg2
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
Power Control Power Flow
Pref
1 1  1 
K11
J 0 s s Ppcc
Dp K 21
K iq 1
K12
s
Qref V Qpcc
K pq K 22
Fig. 3: Small-signal model of the VSG in the resistive-inductive grid.
Sg /Srated [38]. Generally, the utility grid is considered strong
for SCR > 3, weak for 2 ≤ SCR ≤ 3, and very weak for
SCR < 2 [39]. As the strength of the utility grid is constantly
changing, an effective controller of the inverter should be
capable of working in a wide range of conditions. Therefore,
the performance of the controller has to be examined at
different SCRs. After that, the performance of the VSG in grid-
connected mode is examined in this section for different values
of Xg /Rg and for different amplitudes of Zg while Xg /Rg
remains unchanged. In all test cases, the VSG is operated at
the unity power factor, i.e., Qref = 0 MVar.
Fig. 4(a) and (b) shows the simulation results of the VSG
step responses under different SCR values as the Xg /Rg is
3.0 and 1.0, respectively. It can be seen that the SCR of the
grid significantly affects the VSG performance. Specifically,
the step responses deteriorate in terms of overshoot, settling
time, and oscillations under strong grid conditions. In addition,
the VSG performance further deteriorates in all strong, weak,
and very weak grids with smaller Xg /Rg ratios, as shown
in Fig. 4(b), where Xg /Rg is set as 1.0. Fig. 4(c) and (d)
further illustrates the effects of the grid impedance on the
VSG performance. It can be seen that the VSG performance
deteriorates when connected to grids with small Xg /Rg ratios.
However, the effects of varying Xg /Rg are much smaller than
those of varying the grid SCR. Additionally, increasing the
grid impedance magnitude while keeping the Xg /Rg ratio
unchanged results in significant impacts on the step response
of the VSG active power output.
To further explain the effects of the grid conditions on the
VSG performance, Fig. 5 presents the Bode plots for the
test cases presented in Fig. 4. Note that the reactive power
command is set to zero, so K12 and K22 are not considered
in the analysis. Furthermore, K11 and K21 are obtained based
on the linearized small-signal model of the power flow shown
in (12), which are calculated from the steady-state operation of
the VSG. The open-loop transfer functions of the active power
loop considering both K11 and K21 can then be calculated as
∆Ppcc 1

G11−OL (s) = ∆P = K11 ,


ref s(Jω0 s + Dp )
(13)
∆Qpcc 1 power controller in Fig. 3, i.e.,
G21−OL (s) = = K21 .


∆Pref s(Jω0 s + Dp )
Fig. 5(a) and (e) presents the Bode plot of the VSG at two
operating points, i.e., Pref = 2 MW and 4 MW. It can be
observed the variation of the operating point of the VSG in the
5
GCM introduces minor changes in the loop gain of the system
G11−OL (s) and G21−OL (s), yet the closed-loop frequency
response is inherently stable. However, the grid strength and
the Xg /Rg ratio variations have obvious effects on the VSG
transfer functions G11−OL (s) and G21−OL (s).
D. Summary of the VSG Control Challenges in GCM
In Section II-B and Section II-C, it is shown that the VSG
cannot meet the desired performance in both the IM and GCM.
In the IM, the VSG parameters have to be designed according
to several constraints, such as the rated active power and the
RoCoF requirement to avoid a sharp increase or decrease in the
frequency response when loads are disconnected or connected.
In the GCM, if the parameters are not properly selected,
the VSG has a poor dynamic response due to significant
oscillations, a long settling time, and a large overshoot. Such
poor performance is related to the grid conditions such as the
grid strength SCRs, Xg /Rg ratio, and variation of Zg with
the same Xg /Rg ratio. For example, the VSG performance is
worsened further in strong grid conditions.
Given the above analysis, it can be concluded that there is an
inherent trade-off between meeting the RoCoF requirements in
the IM and the fast and robust power regulation in the GCM,
which prevents accurate control of the VSG with assigned
fixed values for its control parameters. Hence, to obviate these
shortcomings, an adaptive VSG control strategy that takes into
account the grid parameters is presented in the next section.
III. P ROPOSED A DAPTIVE C ONTROL OF VSG
Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 show the control structure and the detailed
implementation of the proposed AVSG control strategy. The
control structure is very similar to the conventional VSG
presented in Fig. 1. However, the control parameters Dp ,
J, Kpq , and Kiq of the AVSG are adaptively tuned based
on the online grid impedance estimation (GIE) to achieve
reliable operation upon grid impedance variations. The tuning
procedure is established based on the small-signal model of
the power flow. Therefore, it requires the grid impedance
parameters, which are estimated online by the inverter itself.
Further explanation on the proposed AVSG is provided next.
A. Adaptive Tuning Strategy for the VSG
The small-signal model of the VSG-grid system introduced
in (11) and (12) is employed to obtain the relationship between
the VSG controller parameters and the system response. The
VSG controller parameters are tuned adaptively to obtain the
desired response. As stated previously, Gp (s) and Gq (s) are
defined as the transfer functions of the VSG and the reactive
1
Gp (s) = (14)
s(Jω0 s + Dp )
and
Kiq
Gq (s) = Kpq + , (15)
s
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 6

6 6 6 6
5 5 5 5
4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Fig. 4: VSG performance in GCM upon a change in the active power reference form 2 MW to 4 MW where the J and Dp are kept constant and equal to
the designed values in Subsection II-B: (a) effects of SCR when Xg /Rg = 3.0, (b) effects of SCR when Xg /Rg = 1.0, (c) effects of Xg /Rg parameter
when SCR = 15.0, and (d) effects of variation of Zg for Xg /Rg = 3.0.

50 50 SCR increases 50 -62 100

-62 -64
0 0 0 -66
-63 0
-50 -64 -50
-65 -50
45 50 55 Zg increases
-100 -100 -100 -100
-100 -100 -100
-100

-150 -150 -150 -150

-200 -200 -200 -200

10-2 10 -1
10 0
10 1
10 2
10-2 10 -1
10 0
10 1
10 2
10-2 10 -1
10 0
10 1
10 2
10-2 10-1 100 101 102

(a) (b) (c) (d)

SCR increases 50 50
0 0 0 0
-50 -50 -50 -50
Zg increases
-100 -100 -100 -100
-100 -100 100
0 0
-150 -150 -100 -100
-200 -200 -200 -200
10-2 10-1 100 101 102 10-2 10-1 100 101 102 10-2 10-1 100 101 102 10-2 10-1 100 101 102

(e) (f) (g) (h)

Fig. 5: Bode plots of the VSG transfer functions in the GCM under Qref = 0 MVar and different scenarios of the active power operating points and grid
impedance: (a), (e) at two different operating points Pref = 2 MW and 4 MW for same SCR= 15.0, and Xg /Rg = 3.0, (b), (f) effects of the SCR when
Pref = 4 MW and Qref = 0 MVar for same Xg /Rg = 3.0, (c), (g) effects of the Xg /Rg when Pref = 4 MW for the same SCR = 15.0, and (d), (h) effects
of variation of Zg for same Xg /Rg =3.0 and Pref = 4 MW and Qref = 0 MVar.

Rf Lf PCC Zg vg which can be rearranged as

BESS VSI    −1  
∆θij K11 Gp (s)+1 K12 Gp (s) Gp (s)∆Pref
= .
∆Vi K21 Gq (s) K22 Gq (s)+1 Gq (s)∆Qref
Cf (18)
vdc Gate drives iinv ipcc vpcc iinv By substituting for ∆θij and ∆Vi from (18) into (11), the
PWM t abc system closed-loop transfer functions can be derived that
dq
vdq, pcc
idq, pcc

    
idq, pcc vdq, pcc idq, inv ∆Ppcc H11 H12 ∆Pref
abc
= , (19)
dq t P Control Dp ∆Qpcc H21 H22 ∆Qref
Power calculation

vdc t 1 1 1 Ppcc
where
Reference generator

Inner idq, inv s s J 0 Pref,d

voltage & ref Gp (s)(K11 + M Gq (s))
idq, inj vdq, pcc H11 (s) = , (20)
current 1 1+K11 Gp (s)+K22 Gq (s)+M Gp (s)Gq (s)
v E ref K iq
controllers dq, ref s Qpcc K12 Gq (s)
Proposed idq, inj K pq Qref,d H12 (s) = , (21)
Enable 1+K11 Gp (s)+K22 Gq (s)+M Gp (s)Gq (s)
vdq, pcc control Rg, est, Lg, est Q Control
idq, pcc algorithm Pref,d,Qref,d K21 Gp (s)
Adaptive VSG H21 (s) = , (22)
Pref ,Qref Fig. 7 Dp , J , K pq , K iq 1+K11 Gp (s)+K22 Gq (s)+M Gp (s)Gq (s)
and
Fig. 6: Control structure of the proposed AVSG-based grid-forming inverters.
The principle relies on the online GIE to tune the control parameters in order Gq (s)(K22 + M Gp (s))
to cope with strong and weak grid conditions. H22 (s) = . (23)
1+K11 Gp (s)+K22 Gq (s)+M Gp (s)Gq (s)
In addition, in (20) - (23),
respectively. According to Fig. 3, the relation among ∆θij , M =K11 K22 − K12 K21 . (24)
∆Vi , ∆Pref , and ∆Qref can be written as
∆θij = Gp (s)(∆Pref − K11 ∆θij − K12 ∆Vi ), (16)
To have the desired dynamic response, assume that
and
ωn2
∆Vi = Gq (s)(∆Qref − K21 ∆θij − K22 ∆Vi ), (17) H11 (s) = , (25)
s2 + 2ζωn s + ωn2
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 7

which is a second-order transfer function with the natural J, Dp , Kpq , and Kiq are functions of K11 and K22 , which
frequency being ωn and the damping ratio being ζ. On the are further determined by the operating point, i.e., Rg , Xg ,
one hand, by replacing for H11 (s) from (20) in (25) and then Vi0 , Vj0 , and θij0 .
replacing for Gp (s) and Gq (s) from ((14) and ((15) in the It is worth mentioning that the proposed controller is
obtained equation, one can have designed based on the full power flow expressions presented in
ωn2 1 (M Kpq + K11 )s + M Kiq (9) and (10). Hence, the desired performance criteria (settling
= . time, overshoot, and rising time) are always met regardless of
s(s+2ζωn ) s(Jω0 s+Dp ) (K22 Kpq + 1)s + K22 Kiq
(26) the grid strength (strong or weak) and regardless of the grid
Having (26), the right term should satisfy the following type (resistive or inductive).
conditions:
M Kpq + K11
Jω0 = 2 , (27) B. Online Event-based Grid Impedance Estimation Algorithm
ωn (K22 Kpq + 1)
It is demonstrated above that to tune the VSG to cope with
M Kiq
Dp = 2 , (28) both strong and weak grids, the grid impedance information
ωn (K22 Kpq + 1) should be known in advance. However, one key challenge is
1 that the impedance of the grid varies over time, which hinders
Kiq = 2ζωn (Kpq + ). (29) the optimal design if only fixed values for the grid impedance
K22
are used. Therefore, accurate control can only be achieved
On the other hand, by replacing for J, Dp , and Kiq from (27),
based on the actual value of the grid impedance. To solve
(28), and (29) in (23), one can have
this problem, online GIE algorithms that use the inverter itself
ωn2 M +sK22 (Jω0 s+Dp ) can be used [30]. This approach is cost-effective as it does
H22 (s)= . (30)
s +2ζωn s+ωn2
2
M + KpqsK11
s+Kiq
not require additional hardware and uses only the available
local measurements to estimate the grid impedance seen by
By defining the inverter at the PCC.
M
σ =1− , (31) In this paper, the grid impedance estimation technique based
K11 K22
on single frequency injection at 75 Hz is implemented into the
and control loop of the VSG. The injected frequency signal for
M (K22 Kpq + 1)
γ= , (32) grid impedance measurements is chosen at 75 Hz for several
K22 (M Kpq + K11 )
reasons. First, to ensure accurate impedance measurement: the
H22 (s) can be rearranged as grid impedance changes at low frequencies are insignificant
γσ and can be neglected. Therefore, using 75 Hz injection pro-
γ−1+σ s+ γ−1+σ 2ζωn s2 +2ζωn γs+γωn2
H22 (s)= . (33) vides accurate approximation results of the fundamental grid
γσ s+2ζωn γ s2 +2ζωn s+ωn2 impedance [31]. Second, to avoid interference: for impedance
By selecting estimation, harmonic frequencies (e.g., 100 Hz, 150 Hz, 200
1 Hz) could be used. However, there is a great chance of
Kpq = , (34)
K22 interference between the injected harmonic frequency and the
it can be calculated that same harmonic that is usually presented in the grid background
2 − 2σ due to, for example, other non-linear load/ converters. In this
γ= . (35) case, using an inter-harmonics frequency such as 75 Hz that
2−σ
is unlikely to be presented in the grid background ensures the
Thus, since the cross-coupling terms K12 and K21 are not
avoidance of any possible interaction with the grid background
dominant, i.e., |K12 K21 | 6 |K11 K22 |, it can be concluded
harmonics. Finally, to avoid discrete Fourier transform (DFT)
from (31) that 0 6 σ 6 1, and therefore, 0 6 γ 6 1. As a
leakage: the DFT calculation of the voltage and current at 75
result, in addition to a pair of poles similar to those of H11 (s),
Hz with a minimum window length equal to 40 ms ensures
H22 (s) has a real pole and three zeros in the left-half plane
avoiding the DFT leakage. Here, if 25 Hz is considered the
and stable. Finally, by replacing (34)) in ((27), (28), and (29),
fundamental frequency of the DFT, 50 Hz and 75 Hz become
one can have
2 − σ K11 the second and third harmonics. However, choosing any other
J= , (36) injection frequency such as 60 Hz results in DFT leakage
2ω0 ωn2
as there is no correlation between 50 Hz and the injected
2ζ(1 − σ)K11 harmonic 60 Hz.
Dp = , (37)
ωn To address the impacts of the perturbation currents on
and power quality and the trade-off between active and passive
4ζωn
Kiq = . (38) techniques, this paper proposes a new algorithm to automat-
K22 ically trigger the grid impedance estimation algorithm only
Based on (34), (36), (37), and (38), the VSG and the reactive when required. Therefore, the possible adverse impacts of
power controller can be tuned such that H11 (s) and H22 (s) disturbance amplitude on power quality can be significantly
have the desired responses with the desired natural frequency reduced [26], [40]. Additionally, to ensure a fast and accurate
ωn and damping ζ. However, as can be seen in these equations, estimation of the grid impedance, the perturbation currents
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 8

(id−inj and iq−inj ) are generated in the dq reference frame at Start

25 Hz and added to the current references id−ref and iq−ref
allowing fast tracking of the perturbation currents due to the Islanded mode Operation

Control Mode
fast response of the inner loop. mode?

Selection
Simultaneously with the injection of id−inj and iq−inj , the Grid-connected mode
current and voltage responses (vres (75 Hz), ires (75 Hz)) at the
Enable
PCC of phase A, B, or C are recorded. Then, the fundamental No
AVSG?
grid impedance (Zg (50 Hz)) is estimated by approximating its
Yes
value to Zg (75 Hz) as follows [27], [41].

Impedance
Initialize
    - Inject iqd, inj
∼ vres (75 Hz) ∼ 1 vres (75 Hz) - Estimate Rg , Lg : Eq. (39)
Rg = < , Lg = = . (39)
ires (75 Hz) ω0 ires (75 Hz)
Define paramters of
C. Online Implementation of the Proposed AVSG Use the designed fixed values for
the desired response

Event-based Trigger for Impedance Estimation

 , n , 
Fig. 7 shows in detail the online implementation of the J , Dp , K pq , K iq
Eqs. (4), (6), (8)

Adaptive Tuning of J , Dp , K pq , K iq &

proposed AVSG algorithm, including the GIE algorithm and to meet the Islaned operation Read
the adaptive tuning of the VSG. The proposed algorithm is requirements Pref ,Qref ,TGIE , Ts
summarized below: (e.g., ROCOF rule) Vd-i0 , Vq-i0 ,  ij0

1) Once the inverter is started, the control parameters No

Calculate K11,K21,K12 ,K22
designed by (4), (6) and (8) are used if the inverter is
Eq. (12)
operating in the IM or in the GCM, and the proposed
AVSG is disabled. Rea-time Calculation of
2) Once the AVSG is enabled manually by the operator, the J , Dp , K pq , K iq
GIE algorithm is activated immediately to initialize the Eq. (34), (36), (37), (38)

values of the impedance components Rg and Xg . These

estimated values are used in the next step to calculate Pref == Pref + Ts ?
Yes
the linearized terms of the power flow according to (12). & Qref == Qref + Ts ?

3) The control parameters J, Dp , Kpq , and Kiq of the

No
VSG-based inverter are calculated based on the method
- Delay Pref,d =Pref (t − TGIE )
proposed in (36), (37), (34), and (38), respectively.

Impedance
- Delay Qref,d =Qref (t − TGIE )

Update
Therefore, the inverter can now connect to the grid, and - Inject iqd, inj
the desired response with the desired natural frequency - Estimate Rg , Lg : Eq. (39)
and damping is ensured.
4) Afterwards, the inverter power reference commands AVSG
Yes
are read and continuously monitored for any changes. ON?

Therefore, an enabling signal is automatically generated No

each time the power reference commands are changed.

5) The enabling signal is used to delay the power reference
commands for a time duration equal to the required time
for the GIE algorithm, TGIE = 200 ms. At the same
time, the grid impedance parameters are estimated again
in real-time to ensure reliable monitoring of the grid
impedance variations.
6) Then, the updated impedance values are used to recalcu-
late J, Dp , Kpq and Kiq . By doing so, the inverter can
cope with both strong and weak grid conditions, as the
effects of the grid impedance are resolved in real-time
by the adaptive tuning of the control parameters of the
inverter.
D. Stability Analysis and Robustness
In this section, the stability and the sensitivity to controller
parameters of both the conventional VSG and the proposed
adaptive VSG are analyzed.
1) Stability Analysis: The small-signal model shown in
Fig. 3 is investigated based on the VSG closed-loop transfer
functions shown in (19). For the conventional VSG, the
End
Fig. 7: Flow chart of the proposed AVSG.
parameters (Dp , J,Kpq , Kiq ) used for the stability analysis are
in Table I. However, for the proposed VSG, these parameters
are adaptively calculated from (34), (36), (37), and (38). Here,
ζ and ωn are selected at 0.7 and 5.658 rad/s, to obtain the
desired control response with a settling time of around 0.8 s.
Fig. 8(a) and (b) compares the poles and zeros locations
of the closed-loop transfer function H11 of the conventional
and the proposed adaptive VSG, respectively. While H11 is a
third-order transfer function under the conventional VSG, it is
reshaped to a second-order system under the proposed adaptive
VSG. As explained earlier in Section III, the reshaping of H11
is achieved by selecting the values for the zero and the third
pole located on the real axis to cancel each other out. Fig. 8(b)
shows H11 of the proposed VSG with two poles that can be
fully controlled based on the desired control response. It can
be seen that under the proposed adaptive VSG control scheme,
the poles of the two complex poles are moving away from the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 9

0.974 0.945 0.9 0.82 0.66 0.4 0.992 0.984 0.968 0.935 0.86 0.6

0.997

5 0.99
5
Imaginary Axis

Imaginary Axis
0.997 0.999

035 30 25 20 15 10 5
070 60 50 40 30 20 10

0.997 0.999

-5 0.99
-5 0.997

0.974 0.945 0.9 0.82 0.66 0.4 0.992 0.984 0.968 0.935 0.86 0.6

-35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0
Real Axis Real Axis
(a) (a)

0.974 0.945 0.9 0.82 0.66 0.4 0.992 0.984 0.968 0.935 0.86 0.6

0.997

5 0.99
5
Imaginary Axis

Imaginary Axis
0.997 0.999

035 30 25 20 15 10 5
070 60 50 40 30 20 10

0.997 0.999

-5 0.99
-5 0.997

0.974 0.945 0.9 0.82 0.66 0.4 0.992 0.984 0.968 0.935 0.86 0.6

-35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0
Real Axis Real Axis
(b) (b)

Fig. 8: Poles and zeros map of the closed-loop transfer function H11 : (a) the Fig. 9: Poles and zeros map of the closed-loop transfer function H22 : (a) the
conventional VSG and (b) the proposed adaptive VSG. conventional VSG and (b) the proposed adaptive VSG.

origin, which indicates better system performance with less
oscillations.
Similarly, Fig. 9(a) and (b) shows poles and zeros locations
of the closed-loop transfer function H22 of the conventional
and the proposed adaptive VSG, respectively. Again, placing
the system poles of the proposed adaptive VSG control scheme
far away from the origin improves the system performance.
2) Sensitivity to Controller Parameters: To test the system
robustness, both the conventional and the proposed adaptive
VSG control schemes with various damping and inertia values
are tested. In each case study, to obtain the root loci, the
damping is varied with ±10% of the nominal value while
the inertia is fixed at the nominal value. Then, another test is
conducted by varying the inertia with ±10% of the nominal
value while maintaining the damping fixed at the nominal
value.
Fig. 10(a) and (b) presents the poles and zeros of H11 for the
conventional VSG during variations of the damping and inertia
values, respectively. On the one hand, Fig. 10(a) shows that by
increasing DP [90%, 100%, 110%], the system performance
is improved as the two complex-conjugate closed-loop poles
move far from the origin. On the other hand, increasing J
adversely impacts the system stability as these poles are moved
towards the origin in the s-plane.
The robustness of the proposed adaptive VSG is tested. The
obtained results are shown in Fig. 11(a) and (b). Similarly
to the conventional control, increasing the damping moves
the two complex-conjugate closed-loop poles far from the
origin; see Fig. 11(a). However, the real pole moves in the
opposite direction after increasing Dp from 90% to 110%. It
is worth noting that Dp value at 100% is the optimal tuned
value proposed in this paper. Here, the real zero and pole
cancel each other; hence, these real zero and pole are not
shown in this figure. Fig. 11(b) shows the changing pattern of
the system poles with the variations of its inertia. It can be
seen that increasing J reduces the stability margin as the two
complex-conjugate closed-loop poles move towards the origin.
However, compared to the conventional VSG, the poles of the
system under the proposed control scheme are still roughly far
from the origin.
IV. S IMULATION AND E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS
A. Simulation Results
To evaluate the performance of the proposed AVSG and the
conventional VSG, the system shown in Fig. 6 is simulated
in MATLAB/Simulink and PLECS toolbox. The simulation
parameters are listed in Table I. The investigated test cases
include active and reactive reference command changes for
both weak and strong grid conditions. For each grid condition
with the same SCR, different tests are conducted considering
two different X/R ratios.
1) Strong Grid with SCR = 8.0: In this part, the perfor-
mance of the AVSG is compared with that of the conventional
VSG for strong grid conditions with two Xg /Rg ratios. For
the Xg /Rg = 5, the grid impedance parameters are chosen as
Rg = 2.3 mΩ and Lg = 37.1 µH. To simulate a strong grid
with Xg /Rg = 7, the grid impedance parameters are set to
Rg = 1.68 mΩ and Lg = 37.5 µH.
The obtained results are shown in Fig. 12. Initially, the
inverter active and reactive power reference commands are
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 10

set to 0 MW and 0 MVar, respectively. The AVSG controller

is enabled at t =5 s. At t =10 s, the inverter active power
0.964 0.935 0.87 0.74 0.45
0.984

3.49
reference command changes from 0 to 2 MW. Then, it changes
5 0.993 at t =25 s to 4 MW. Finally, at t =40 s, the reactive power
3.48
Imaginary Axis

0.999
reference command changes from 0 to 1.5 MVar. Fig. 12(a)
3.47
and (d) shows the dq components of the PCC voltage for
040 35 30 25 20 15 10 5

3.46
-0.6 -0.4 both the VSG and AVSG corresponding to Xg /Rg = 5 and
0.999

Real Axis
1
0 30 Xg /Rg = 7, respectively. Overall, it can be seen that the AVSG
-1
-5
0.993

-31 -30 -29 -28 ensures seamless transient performance without oscillations
Real Axis
0.984
0.964 0.935 0.87 0.74 0.45
with a settling time of around 0.8 s.
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 Additionally, as shown in Fig. 12(b) and (e), the dq com-
Real Axis ponents of PCC current change within the desired system
(a) response. The zoom-in view in Fig. 12(b) and (c) presents
0.984
0.964 0.935 0.87 0.74 0.45
the small variations in the dq current required to estimate the
3.8 grid impedance in real-time. As stated previously, these small
5 0.993

3.6
variations result from the injected 75 Hz perturbations in the
Imaginary Axis

0.999 dq current reference for a duration of t =200 ms.

3.4
040 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Fig. 12(c) and (f) validates the robust performance of
0.999
3.2
-0.6 the AVSG in a strong grid against both Xg /Rg = 5 and
1
0 30
Xg /Rg = 7. In contrast to the proposed AVSG, the conven-
-5
0.993
-1
-31 -30 -29 -28 tional VSG shows an unstable operation in the higher inductive
0.984
0.964 0.935 0.87 0.74 0.45
grid Xg /Rg = 7 after the reactive power reference command
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 changes from 0 to 1.5 MVar while the inverter injects its rated
Real Axis
active power of 4 MW.
(b)
2) Weak Grid with SCR = 1.5: Similar to the previous test
Fig. 10: Variations of poles and zeros pole of the closed-loop transfer function in strong grid conditions, the grid impedance parameters are
H11 of the conventional VSG with: (a) [90%, 100%, 110%]×Dp and fixed
J and (b) [90%, 100%, 110%]×J and fixed Dp . chosen to simulate three case studies for a weak grid with
SCR = 1.5.
In the first case study, the grid parameters are chosen as
Rg = 8.9 mΩ and Lg = 200 µH to obtain Xg /Rg = 7.
In the second case study, the grid parameters are chosen as
5 0.88 0.8 0.68 0.54 0.36 0.18
Rg = 20 mΩ and Lg = 191.6 µH to obtain Xg /Rg = 3. Finally,
0.95 the third case study investigates a resistive grid in which the
grid parameters are set to Rg = 44.9 mΩ and Lg = 142.8 µH
Imaginary Axis

0.985

to obtain Xg /Rg = 1.
010 8 6 4 2

The simulated events of active and reactive power refer-

0.985 1 ence commands changes are similar to those reported in the
0
-1 previous section for strong grid tests. Fig. 13 shows that the
0.95
-7.8 -7.7 -7.6 -7.5
AVSG outperforms the conventional VSG. It is evident that
-5
0.88 0.8 0.68 0.54 0.36 0.18

the AVSG is robust against the variations of the Xg /Rg ratio.

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0
Real Axis The presented results in Fig. ?? of the proposed controller
(a) to fully decouple the active and reactive power flow even
in a weak grid with a low Xg /Rg ratio. These findings are
5 0.88 0.8 0.68 0.54 0.36 0.18

expected as the proposed control scheme is designed based on

0.95
the power flow equations (9) and (10) that take into account
Imaginary Axis

0.985 the grid resistance and inductance which are being estimated
in real-time. Consequently, the proposed AVSG is capable of
010 8 6 4 2

mitigating the oscillations in both the active power and the

0.985 1
0
PCC voltage, relying on the estimated grid resistance and
0.95
-1
-7.8 -7.7 -7.6 -7.5 inductance from (39). Furthermore, the dynamic performance
0.88 0.8 0.68 0.54 0.36 0.18
of the conventional VSG further deteriorates in the weak
-5
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 resistive grid, as shown in Fig. 13(g), (h) and (i).
Real Axis Fig. 14 depicts the control signals, the PCC current, and the
(b) estimated grid impedance of the AVSG for the third case study
Fig. 11: Variations of poles and zeros of the closed-loop transfer function with Xg /Rg = 1. Fig. 14(a) shows that the GIE algorithm
H11 of the proposed adaptive VSG with: (a) [90%, 100%, 110%]×Dp and is automatically activated four times at 5, 10, 25, and 40 s.
fixed J and (b) [90%, 100%, 110%] ×J and fixed Dp . Unlike the first activation of the GIE algorithm at t =5 s that
corresponds to the time instance of enabling the AVSG, the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 11

800 8000 6

6000
600 4
564 4000
400 570
563
2000 2
566
0.5
200 0 100
562 10 0
10 11 12 -0.5 0 0
10 10.2
-2000 -10
0 -100
9 10 11 12 10 10.1 10.2
-4000 -2
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

(a) (b) (c)

800 104
1.5 10

600 1
564 0.5 5
568
400
566 563 0
564 0.5 100 20
200 -0.5 0
562 0 0
10 11 12 13-0.5 -1
0 10 10.2 -100 -20
9 10 11 12 10 10.1 10.2
-1.5 -5
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

(d) (e) (f)

Fig. 12: The simulation results of the conventional VSG and the AVSG upon changes in the active and reactive power references when the inverter is connected
to a strong grid SCR = 8.0 and: (a), (b), (c) Xg /Rg = 5 and (d), (e), (f) Xg /Rg = 7.

800 8000 6

6000
600 4
580 564 4000
400 563.5
560
2000 2
563
0.5
200 0 5
540 0 100
10 11 12
0
-0.5 -2000 0 0
0 10 10.2 -100 -5
10 11 12 10 10.1 10.2
-4000 -2
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

(a) (b) (c)

800 6000 6

600 4000 4
600 564

400 563.5 2000

580 563 2
0.5
200 0 0 5
560 100
10 11 12 0
-0.5 0 0
10 10.2
0 -2000 -100 -5
10 11 12 10 10.1 10.2
-2
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

(d) (e) (f)

1000 6000 6

800
4000 4
600 750 564
700 563.5 2000
400 650 563
2
0.5
600
200 0 0 100 5
550 0
10 12 -0.5 0 0
0 10 10.2
-2000 -100 -5
10 11 12 10 10.1 10.2
-200 -2
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

(g) (h) (i)

Fig. 13: Simulation results of the conventional VSG and the AVSG upon changes in the active and reactive power references when the inverter is connected
to a weak grid SCR = 1.5 and: (a), (b), (c) Xg /Rg = 7; (d), (e), (f) Xg /Rg = 3; and (g), (h), (i) Xg /Rg = 1.

GIE algorithm is enabled automatically at 10, 25, and 40 s Fig. 14(c) compares the estimated grid components (Rest and
due to changes in the inverter active and reactive reference Lest ) with their true/reference values. It is evident that the
commands. Fig. 14(a) also depicts the perturbation currents, proposed implementation of the GIE is reliable and provides
i.e., id−inj and iq−inj , required for the impedance estimation. very accurate results.
It can be seen that the GIE algorithm has minimal impact
on the system as it does not disrupt the system continuously, Fig. 15 shows the control parameters of the proposed
and the injected perturbation currents have relatively small adaptive tuning scheme. For t < 5 s, the original control
amplitudes of 3.3 A. Fig. 14(b) shows the PCC current with a parameters listed in Table I are used. Then, these parameters
zoom-in view of the time duration when the GIE is enabled. are tuned adaptively when the proposed control scheme is
enabled for t ≥ 5 s. To ensure desired performance under
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 12

1.5 1.5 6000 60

1 1 40
0.5 4000 44.895
0.5
0 2060 20 44.89
0 -0.5
2000 44.885
0 10 20 30 40 50
-0.5 2058
5 0 0.2
5
2056
-2000
0 0 2 25 25.2 0.1 0.1429
0
-4000 -2
-5 0.14285
-5
10 10.1 10.2
-6000
5 5.1 5.2 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 14: The simulation results of the AVSG in a very weak grid (SCR = 1.5, Xg /Rg = 1): (a) enable signal and dq current injections for GIE; (b) PCC
current; and (c) references and estimated grid resistance and inductance.

106 Oscilloscopes Imperix Inverter

4
and Regatron
2 AC Grid
Imperix Controller
0
Simulator
5000 Sensors

2500 Filter

0 Grid Impedance
0 10 20 30 40 50

(a) Interface
-4
10
1
DC Power Supply
0.5
Fig. 16: The experimental setup.
0
10-3 TABLE II: Parameters of the experimental setup.
2
Quantity Value Unit Description
1 Grid parameters
vg 110 V Grid voltage (L-L)
f 50 Hz Nominal frequency
0 Rg , Lg 0.85, 3.0 Ω, mH Strong grid with SCR=6.74, Xg /Rg =1.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 Rg , Lg 0.67, 10.5 Ω, mH Weak grid with SCR=2.54, Xg /Rg =4.92
Inverter parameters
Sbase 1.4142 kVA Inverter rated power
(b) Pbase 1.0 kW Inverter rated active power
vdc 320 V DC Bus voltage
Fig. 15: The simulation results of control parameters tuning of the proposed fsw 20 kHz Inverter PWM carrier frequency
AVSG in a very weak grid (SCR = 1.5, Xg /Rg = 1): (a) control parameters Lf 4 mH Filter inductance
of the active power channel and (b) control parameters of the reactive power Rf 0.06 Ω Filter resistance
channel. Cf 30 µF Filter capacitance
Fixed parameters for the conventional VSG
Dp 318.3 W/Hz Damping coefficient
J 1.013 kg.m2 Inertia coefficient
−3
Kpq 7.18× 10 VAR/V Proportional gain of reactive power controller
different operating points, the control parameters are re-tuned Kiq 1× 10 −5
1/s Integral gain of reactive power controller
after applying the step changes in the active power reference
at t =10 and 25 s and the reactive power reference at t =40 s.
The performance of the controllers is tested in both strong
and weak grids. In each test, step changes in the active and
B. Experimental Results reactive power reference commands are applied. The times of
In this section, the experimental results based on a scaled- application of these tests are referred to as t1 , t2 , and t3 in
down setup are presented to validate the effectiveness of the Fig. 17 and Fig. 18. Initially, both inverters operate in the
proposed control. The tested systems are the conventional VSG steady-state where the power reference commands are Pref =
and the AVSG as presented in Fig. 1 and Fig. 6, respectively. 200 W and Qref = 0 VAR. Then, for the proposed AVSG, the
The system parameters used for the experiment are listed control algorithm is enabled at t1 , and the values of id−inj and
in Table II. Fig. 16 shows the experimental setup used to iq−inj are set to 0.25 A. After 5 s of enabling the AVSG, a
evaluate the control performance. It consists of a DC power step change in the active power reference command from 200
supply, a SiC-based two-level three-phase Imperix inverter, to 800 W is applied at t2 . Finally, a step change in the reactive
an LC filter, an RL grid impedance, and a Regatron grid power reference command from 0 to 150 VAR is applied at
simulator. The control algorithm is implemented directly from t3 .
MATLAB/Simulink into the BoomBox Imperix Controller. Fig. 17 shows the experimental results in a strong grid.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 13

t2 t3 t2 t3

[3 s/div] [4 s/div]
Pref changes Qref changes Pref changes Qref changes
[2 A/div] ia ib ic [2 A/div] ia ib ic

[4 ms/div] [4 ms/div]

(a) (a)

Enable the proposed control Enable the proposed control

t1 t2 t3 t1 t2 t3

[3 s/div] [4 s/div]
Pref changes Qref changes Pref changes Qref changes
[2 A/div] ia ib ic [2 A/div] ia ib ic

[4 ms/div] [4 ms/div]

(b) (b)

(c) (c)

Fig. 17: The experimental results of the conventional and the AVSG in a Fig. 18: The experimental results of the conventional and the AVSG in a
strong grid (SCR=6.74, Xg /Rg =1.1): (a) PCC current waveforms of the weak grid (SCR=2.54, Xg /Rg =4.92): (a) PCC current waveforms of the
conventional VSG, (b) PCC current waveforms of the proposed AVSG, and conventional VSG, (b) PCC current waveforms of the proposed AVSG, and
(c) PCC power waveforms. (c) PCC power waveforms.

Fig. 17(a), (b) and (c) compares the PCC currents and the
power tracking capability of the VSG and the proposed AVSG,
respectively. It is evident that there are significant oscillations
in the output power waveform of the conventional VSG for
almost 10 s. In contrast, the AVSG ensures the desired dy-
namic performance. After changing the active power reference
command, the AVSG takes around 1 s to settle down (0.2 s
for the GIE and 0.8 s for tracking the new power reference
commands).
It is worth emphasizing that during the test, the control
parameters of the traditional VSG are kept fixed at those
values presented in Table II. These fixed values are based
on the rated power of the inverter and the desired RoCoF.
However, the control parameters of the proposed control are
automatically tuned during this test based on the proposed
equations in this paper, i.e., (34), (36), (37), and (38). The
corresponding steady-state control parameters of the proposed
controller are presented in Table III.
Similarly, Fig. 18 shows the experimental results in a weak
grid. Fig. 18(a), (b) and (c) compares the PCC currents and
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
TABLE III: The experimental results of steady-state control parameters of
the proposed adaptive VSG.
Time Event Dp J Kpq
0<t< 5 s Before enabling the adaptive VSG 318.3 1.013 7.18×10−3
5<t≤ 10 s After enabling the proposed controller 3225.5 1.0 8.63×10−3
10<t≤ 20 s After P step-change 3386.8 1.09 7.0×10−3
20<t≤ 30 s After Q step-change 3471.2 1.12 6.8×10−3
the power tracking capability of the VSG and the proposed
AVSG, respectively. It can be observed that the proposed
AVSG ensures seamless transients in a weak grid. It requires
a time duration equal to 1 s to settle down, the same as the
desired performance for the strong grid condition. In contrast,
the VSG has poor dynamic performance in a weak grid due
to the large grid inductance. However, it still performs better
than the strong grid case.
V. C ONCLUSIONS
This paper initially reveals the negative impacts of the grid
parameters (SCR, Xg /Rg ratios, and different amplitudes of
the grid impedance) on the performance of the VSG. Then,
an online grid impedance estimation-based adaptive control
strategy is proposed to ensure full decoupling of the active
and reactive power flow. This technique ensures full control
of the real and reactive powers with the same desired dynamic
performance, such as no oscillation, specified time duration for
the settling time, and minimal overshoot, regardless of the grid
parameters. The proposed control is established based on the
online estimation of the grid impedance using the frequency
injection estimation algorithm embedded into the control loop
of the inverter. Furthermore, to avoid the unnecessary continu-
ous estimation of the grid impedance, the estimation algorithm
is automated to re-estimate the grid impedance only if the
active or reactive power reference commands are changed. The
simulation and experimental results validate the efficacy of
the proposed online grid impedance estimation-based adaptive
control for VSGs in both strong and weak grid conditions.
R EFERENCES
[1] R. Secretariat, “Renewables 2020 global status report,” Rep. Paris:
REN12, 2020.
[2] Q.-C. Zhong, “Power-electronics-enabled autonomous power systems:
Architecture and technical routes,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 64, no. 7, pp. 5907–5918, 2017.
[3] X. Wang, M. G. Taul, H. Wu, Y. Liao, F. Blaabjerg, and L. Harne-
fors, “Grid-synchronization stability of converter-based resources—an
overview,” IEEE Open Journal of Industry Applications, vol. 1, pp. 115–
134, 2020.
[4] W. Zhou, Y. Wang, R. E. Torres-Olguin, and Z. Chen, “Effect of reactive
power characteristic of offshore wind power plant on low-frequency
stability,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 35, no. 2, pp.
837–853, 2020.
[5] W. Zhou, R. E. Torres-Olguin, Y. Wang, and Z. Chen, “Dq impedance-
decoupled network model-based stability analysis of offshore wind
power plant under weak grid conditions,” IET Power Electronics, vol. 13,
no. 13, pp. 2715–2729, 2020.
[6] M. Z. Mansour, M. H. Ravanji, A. Karimi, and B. Bahrani, “Linear
Parameter-Varying Control of A Power-Synchronized Grid-Following
Inverter,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power
Electronics, 2022.
[7] R. H. Lasseter, Z. Chen, and D. Pattabiraman, “Grid-forming inverters:
A critical asset for the power grid,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and
Selected Topics in Power Electronics, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 925–935, 2019.
14
[8] D. B. Rathnayake, M. Akrami, C. Phurailatpam, S. P. Me, S. Hadavi,
G. Jayasinghe, S. Zabihi, and B. Bahrani, “Grid forming inverter
Kiq modeling, control, and applications,” IEEE Access, 2021.
1× 10−5 [9] K. M. Cheema, “A comprehensive review of virtual synchronous gener-
0.138
0.112
ator,” International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, vol.
0.109 120, p. 106006, 2020.
[10] X. Meng, J. Liu, and Z. Liu, “A generalized droop control for grid-
supporting inverter based on comparison between traditional droop
control and virtual synchronous generator control,” IEEE Transactions
on Power Electronics, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 5416–5438, 2018.
[11] T. Wen, D. Zhu, X. Zou, B. Jiang, L. Peng, and Y. Kang, “Power
coupling mechanism analysis and improved decoupling control for vir-
tual synchronous generator,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 3028–3041, 2020.
[12] B. Li, L. Zhou, X. Yu, C. Zheng, and J. Liu, “Improved power
decoupling control strategy based on virtual synchronous generator,”
IET Power Electronics, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 462–470, 2017.
[13] M. Li, Y. Wang, W. Hu, S. Shu, P. Yu, Z. Zhang, and F. Blaabjerg,
“Unified modeling and analysis of dynamic power coupling for grid-
forming converters,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 37,
no. 2, pp. 2321–2337, 2021.
[14] Y. Li and Y. W. Li, “Power management of inverter interfaced au-
tonomous microgrid based on virtual frequency-voltage frame,” IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 30–40, 2011.
[15] T. Wu, Z. Liu, J. Liu, S. Wang, and Z. You, “A unified virtual power
decoupling method for droop-controlled parallel inverters in microgrids,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 5587–5603,
2015.
[16] J. M. Guerrero, L. G. De Vicuna, J. Matas, M. Castilla, and J. Miret,
“Output impedance design of parallel-connected ups inverters with wire-
less load-sharing control,” IEEE Transactions on industrial electronics,
vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 1126–1135, 2005.
[17] J. Matas, M. Castilla, L. G. de Vicuna, J. Miret, and J. C. Vasquez,
“Virtual impedance loop for droop-controlled single-phase parallel in-
verters using a second-order general-integrator scheme,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 2993–3002, 2010.
[18] H. Zhang, S. Kim, Q. Sun, and J. Zhou, “Distributed adaptive virtual
impedance control for accurate reactive power sharing based on consen-
sus control in microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 8,
no. 4, pp. 1749–1761, 2016.
[19] J. C. Vasquez, J. M. Guerrero, A. Luna, P. Rodrı́guez, and R. Teodorescu,
“Adaptive droop control applied to voltage-source inverters operating in
grid-connected and islanded modes,” IEEE transactions on industrial
electronics, vol. 56, no. 10, pp. 4088–4096, 2009.
[20] U. B. Tayab, M. A. B. Roslan, L. J. Hwai, and M. Kashif, “A review
of droop control techniques for microgrid,” Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, vol. 76, pp. 717–727, 2017.
[21] B. Li and L. Zhou, “Power decoupling method based on the diagonal
compensating matrix for vsg-controlled parallel inverters in the micro-
grid,” Energies, vol. 10, no. 12, p. 2159, 2017.
[22] T. Wen, X. Zou, D. Zhu, X. Guo, L. Peng, and Y. Kang, “Comprehensive
perspective on virtual inductor for improved power decoupling of virtual
synchronous generator control,” IET Renewable Power Generation,
vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 485–494, 2020.
[23] D. B. Rathnayake, R. Razzaghi, and B. Bahrani, “Generalized virtual
synchronous generator control design for renewable power systems,”
IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1021–
1036, 2022.
[24] H. Wu, X. Ruan, D. Yang, X. Chen, W. Zhao, Z. Lv, and Q.-C. Zhong,
“Small-signal modeling and parameters design for virtual synchronous
generators,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 63, no. 7,
pp. 4292–4303, 2016.
[25] M. Céspedes and J. Sun, “Online grid impedance identification for
adaptive control of grid-connected inverters,” in 2012 IEEE Energy
Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE). IEEE, 2012, pp. 914–
921.
[26] N. Mohammed, T. Kerekes, and M. Ciobotaru, “An online event-based
grid impedance estimation technique using grid-connected inverters,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 6106–6117,
2020.
[27] N. Mohammed, M. Ciobotaru, and G. Town, “Fundamental grid
impedance estimation using grid-connected inverters: A comparison of
two frequency-based estimation techniques,” IET Power Electronics,
vol. 13, no. 13, pp. 2730–2741, 2020.
[28] N. Hoffmann and F. W. Fuchs, “Minimal invasive equivalent grid
impedance estimation in inductive–resistive power networks using ex-
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
tended Kalman filter,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 29,
no. 2, pp. 631–641, 2013.
[29] S. Cobreces, E. J. Bueno, D. Pizarro, F. J. Rodriguez, and F. Huerta,
“Grid impedance monitoring system for distributed power generation
electronic interfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Mea-
surement, vol. 58, no. 9, pp. 3112–3121, 2009.
[30] M. Ciobotaru, V. Agelidis, and R. Teodorescu, “Line impedance estima-
tion using model based identification technique,” in Proceedings of the
2011 14th European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications.
IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–9.
[31] L. Asiminoaei, R. Teodorescu, F. Blaabjerg, and U. Borup, “Implementa-
tion and test of an online embedded grid impedance estimation technique
for PV inverters,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 52,
no. 4, pp. 1136–1144, 2005.
[32] T. Roinila, T. Messo, and A. Aapro, “Impedance measurement of
three phase systems in DQ-domain: Applying MIMO-identification
techniques,” in 2016 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition
(ECCE). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–6.
[33] N. Mohammed and M. Ciobotaru, “Fast and accurate grid impedance
estimation approach for stability analysis of grid-connected inverters,”
Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 207, p. 107831, 2022.
[34] W. Uijlings and J. Timpert, “Rocof alternative solutions technology
assessment,” DNV GL Energy Advisory, 2015.
[35] N. Modi, R. Yan et al., “Low inertia power systems: Frequency response
challenges and a possible solution,” in 2016 Australasian universities
power engineering conference (AUPEC). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–6.
[36] J. M. Guerrero, M. Chandorkar, T.-L. Lee, and P. C. Loh, “Advanced
control architectures for intelligent microgrids—part i: Decentralized
and hierarchical control,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 1254–1262, 2012.
[37] J. M. Guerrero, J. C. Vasquez, J. Matas, L. G. De Vicuña, and
M. Castilla, “Hierarchical control of droop-controlled AC and DC micro-
grids—A general approach toward standardization,” IEEE Transactions
on industrial electronics, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 158–172, 2010.
[38] W. Rui, S. Qiuye, M. Dazhong, and H. Xuguang, “Line impedance
cooperative stability region identification method for grid-tied inverters
under weak grids,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 4,
pp. 2856–2866, 2020.
[39] D. Zhu, S. Zhou, X. Zou, and Y. Kang, “Improved design of PLL
controller for LCL-type grid-connected converter in weak grid,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 4715–4727, 2019.
[40] P. Garcia, M. Sumner, Á. Navarro-Rodrı́guez, J. M. Guerrero, and
J. Garcia, “Observer-based pulsed signal injection for grid impedance
estimation in three-phase systems,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, vol. 65, no. 10, pp. 7888–7899, 2018.
[41] A. V. Timbus, R. Teodorescu, F. Blaabjerg, and U. Borup, “Online
grid impedance measurement suitable for multiple pv inverters running
in parallel,” in Twenty-First Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics
Conference and Exposition, 2006. APEC’06. IEEE, 2006, pp. 5–pp.
NABIL MOHAMMED (Member, IEEE) received
the bachelor’s degree (Hons.) in electrical power
engineering from Tishreen University, in 2013, the
M.Eng. degree in electrical engineering from Uni-
versiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), in 2017, and the
PhD degree in power electronics from Macquarie
University, Australia, in 2022. During the summer
of 2019, he was a Visiting Researcher at the De-
partment of Energy Technology, Aalborg University,
Denmark. He is currently a Postdoctoral Research
Fellow at Monash University, Australia. His research
interests include power electronic converters, renewable energy generation and
integration in power systems, microgrids, energy storage and management
systems, and modeling and control of electric systems.
15
MOHAMMAD HASAN RAVANJI (Member,
IEEE) received his B.Sc., M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees
all in electrical power engineering from Sharif Uni-
versity of Technology (SUT), Tehran, Iran, in 2012,
2014, and 2020, respectively. He was a visiting
student with the University of Waterloo, Waterloo,
ON, Canada from Oct. 2017 to April 2018. Further,
he was with the Iran Grid Management Company
(IGMC), Tehran, Iran, as a researcher in their system
planning and dynamic studies group from Feb. 2019
to July 2020. He is currently a post-doctoral research
fellow at Monash University, Clayton, Australia. His current research interests
include power system stability, renewable energy systems and the application
of grid forming and grid following inverters in weak power grids.
WEIHUA ZHOU (Member, IEEE) was born in
Anhui, China, in 1993. He received the B.Eng. de-
gree in electrical engineering from the Honors Col-
lege, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an,
China, in 2014, the M.Sc. degree in electrical engi-
neering from the School of Automation, Northwest-
ern Polytechnical University, in 2017, and the Ph.D.
degree in power electronics from the Department
of Energy Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg,
Denmark, in 2020.
From November 2015 to May 2016, he was a
Junior Research Assistant at the Department of Mechanical and Automation
Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. From
August 2020 to November 2020, he was a Visiting Scholar at the Department
of Marine Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim, Norway. In 2021, he was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Department
of Electrical Engineering, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. He is currently a
Postdoctoral Research Fellow with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Systems Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. His research
interests include modeling and control of power electronic converters, energy
storage systems, and stability analysis and enhancement of power electronic-
and underground cable-based modern power systems.
BEHROOZ BAHRANI (Senior Member, IEEE)
received the B.Sc. degree from Sharif University of
Technology, Tehran, Iran, the M.Sc. degree from
the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada,
and the PhD degree from the Ecole Polytechnique
Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzer-
land, all in electrical engineering, in 2006, 2008,
and 2012, respectively. From September 2012 to
September 2015, he was a Postdoctoral Fellow at
several institutions including EPFL, Purdue Univer-
sity, West Lafayette, IN, USA, Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA, and the Technical University of Munich,
Munich, Germany. Since 2015, he has been with Monash University, Clayton,
Australia, where currently, he is a Senior Lecturer and the Director of the Grid
Innovation Hub. His research interests include control of power electronics
systems, applications of power electronics in power and traction systems, and
grid integration of renewable energy resources.