Design and Development of a True Decentralized

Control Architecture for Microgrid

Abedalsalam Bani-Ahmed*, Adel Nasiri† and Hossein Hosseini‡
Center for Sustainable Electrical Energy Systems
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Email: *baniahm2@uwm.edu, †nasiri@uwm.edu, ‡hosseini@uwm.edu
URL: uwm.edu/eepowerlab/

Abstract—Emerging smart grid concept compels microgrids to

adopt decentralized methods. Centralized methods of operation
are more susceptible to failure due to single point of failure held
by the single controller. Decentralized microgrid control
architecture is proposed, improving system reliability and
avoiding control command transmission over the network. Delays
in communications are unpredictable, uncertainty of data
exchange delays leads to inaccurate modeling. As solution,
Hardware-in-The-Loop platform is developed using real physical
communication links and network components, and applying the
concept of decentralization dynamically over a network of real-
time controllers. The proposed system insures reliable data
exchange between controllers and microgrid components. Case
study is adopted for testing purposes. Results proves the
robustness of the architecture as long as the properties of a true
decentralized system is maintained.

Index Terms—Control Systems, Decentralized System,
Distributed Systems, Microgrid Communications, Smart Grid,
SCADA, HIL.
I. INTRODUCTION
Power systems are distributed in nature, microgrid in
particular serves as an integral part of future power distribution
system. Decentralizing power production aside from the utility
providers, local controls are necessary for this type of future
solution power loss due to power distribution to distant areas.
That justifies the huge attention from researchers in academy
and industry, and expected to push the microgrid market to
increase by 400% in 2020 compared to 2013 [1].
Typically, microgrids operate connected to the utility grid.
From the grid point of view, the microgrid appears as one entity
that connects to it at point of common coupling (PCC) that
allows bidirectional flow of power. Intentional or non-
intentional islanding can occur at any time forcing the
microgrid to operate in an islanded mode, maintaining a
continuous supply of power to the local loads. One of the main
challenges to make this a reality is the integration of the non-
traditional sources of energy such as wind, solar or any bio-
based source. Dispatchable sources such as energy storage and
natural gas generator can be integrated in order to overcome the
intermittent nature challenge of renewable sources
Control strategies for microgrids have been developed for
the past decade targeting the seamless transients and transparent
changes in microgrid operation to the load. However, control of
microgrids generally more difficult than a traditional power
Figure 1. Generic Microgrid Control Architecture.
system due to limited energy storage capacity and lack of
inertia, fast dynamics and short response time of inverter-based
distributed resources, and a high degree of parametric and
topological uncertainties [3]. These issues transform into more
complex challenges when the system reliability is at risk, and a
robust control architecture becomes essential to smart grid
functionality is enabled. That includes the intelligent
interconnection and integration of DERs, demand response, and
consequently achieving net metering. Figure 1 shows an
example of microgrid control architecture, one central
controller collects data from local limited capabilities
controllers, other data are collected from meters across the grid
with many sensing capabilities. The communication
architecture is represented by a communication line between
the central controller and the local controllers, another tightly
coupled communication line between the local controller and
the distributed generation source [2].
Many significant efforts have been published decentralized
control systems for microgrids. The proof of concept has been
established [8], with the lack of communication optimization.
For a distributed system, the challenge of communication delays
can stumble the concept of decentralization. Another concern in
[6] where the true decentralized control system eliminates the
master controller (or coordinator) which is considered a single
point of failure to the whole system. Other efforts proposed
simulated algorithms for self-coordination [7] [5] without
considering the system delays and their impact on these
algorithms. This paper introduces a proof-of-concept of true

978-1-5090-0737-0/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE

 Figure 2. Microgrid Decentralized Control Architecture.

decentralization of microgrid control architecture. Device level

and system level models are defined for a self-coordination. This Figure 3. Decentralized controller design.
paper is organized as follows: definition of true decentralized
these capabilities are discussed in the controller model next
control architecture for microgrids. Discussion of system section.
architecture and its fundamental models. Description of the case
study investigated using the developed Hardware-In-the-Loop III. SYSTEM DESIGN
platform. A future work of this paper includes the
Designing a reliable decentralized control system should
communications and coordination algorithms with diagnostic
take into consideration three fundamental models:
algorithm, and failure state handling routines.
A. Controller model
II. DECENTRALIZED MICROGRID CONTROL ARCHITECTURE The proposed design of the control agents is shown in Figure
3. For simplicity, the design is virtually divided into three main
A true decentralized microgrid control architecture has the units: Processing unit, where the main control logic algorithm
following properties: is running, with the interrupt handling routines in standby mode
Decentralized: given in the concept, a decentralized in case of any system faults. Faults will be discussed on the
architecture suggests having multiple local controllers in order following fundamental model. Additionally, the processing
to achieve seamless transients during the operation and acts as units contains data verification and consistency algorithms.
if the system has one central controller. These two units are partially responsible of running certain
Resource sharing: every controller shares the status of its analysis on the inputs from the peer controllers. Faults
own DER with other controllers in real-time. This requires diagnostic and detection algorithm is required for his design,
naming scheme that guarantees unique identification of each triggering the interrupt handling routine.
controller and its local DER.
The memory unit interacts with the processing unit in order
Concurrency: Each controller must have an up-to-date
to manage buffered data and temporary log. It also provides
status of the whole system, especially for the inputs to the
peer controllers information as inputs to the control algorithm.
microgrid control algorithm running in each controller. This is
Dynamic DER directory holds the power components object
a key requirement to protect the integrity of the system from
model (Table 1). The communication model interacts with
being violated, otherwise, inconsistent algorithm outputs and
other peers and provides raw data of the whole system.
control commands may arise, which can lead to disturbance in
B. Interaction Model:
the microgrid operation.
This model defines the necessary data to be exchanged
Scalability: The architecture allows the microgrid to be
between controllers, the way they interact, and the frequency of
scaled up or down in terms of the number of power components
data transmission. Data traffic starts from the power system
without affecting the operation or re-engineering the control
layer, where the components transmit their status data and
algorithm.
measurements through the communication layer. Status data can
Fault-tolerance: The system must maintain available and
be breaker status, device warnings or flags, measurements of
operating at the minimum level of reliability. This also include
voltage, active and reactive power, and frequency of each power
the recovery process in case of faults and possible redundancy
component. Each controller receives data from its designated
that may boost the reliability of the microgrid.
DER, validates the received information and synchronizes
Figure 2 represents the proposed decentralized
clocks. Ensuring that the data received is the most recent
architecture. As illustrated, the decentralized architecture
measurements following Equations (1-4); considering possible
differs from the architecture in Figure 1 by elimination of the
delays or dropped data packets during transmission over the
centralized controller, and replacement of local controller with
network. Unit commitment and control algorithm process the
higher capability decentralized microgrid controller (DMGC),
inputs and sends back commands through the communication
layer, which is responsible of routing the commands to the
designated power component.
The control system layer is a combination of the distributed
controllers, communication lines, and switching/routing devices
in between. Communication unit in Figure 3 handles the
interaction with peer controllers, and ensures minimum data loss
due to high traffic and network congestion. However, it is
tangential to choose the optimal network topology that works
best in terms of data delay without major drawbacks in system
behavior especially when transient operation is performed.

Table 1 Generic object model and data representation for microgrid

power components
DG Type Wind, Solar, Energy Storage, Generator…etc.
IP Address Unique IP address within the control subnet
Attributes Status, active power, reactive power, bus voltage,
frequency, breaker status, commands.
C. Failure model
Failure model contains aspects that relate to system
reliability and availability. Most importantly, designing a self-
healing distributed control system relies mainly on the
robustness of the recovery algorithm in the interrupt routine.
Figure 4 illustrates controller state diagram with failure
handling. During normal operation, it is possible to reset the
controller at any time going back to the normal operation with
no failures reported. If power system fault is detected, the
controller moves to system fault handling routine, which is
basically checks the status flags reported by other controllers
and removes certain DER from the dynamic directory if any
Figure 4. Controller state diagram with fault triggered state transitions.
Similarly, the control cycle during state transition (Figure 4)
requires updates transmission to ensure concurrency. This
allows each controller to make the correct decision. However,
the normal operation algorithm halts during self-healing
process, but this time should be at minimum to prevent and
reflection of this fault onto the microgrid operation.
As mentioned before, a true distributed control system
appears as if the microgrid has a master controller to the power
system layer. The main focus in this paper is to introduce this
concept by proposing an interaction method between the
distributed controllers. Starting with normal operation for all n
distributed controllers; for a controller Ci at time t, analysis of
the system status follows the equations:
௡

failure is detected; then the controller goes back to normal ܲ௡௘௧ ȁ௧ ൌ ෍൫݁௉ ܲ஼೔ ൯ ൌ Ͳ‫݌‬Ǥ ‫ݑ‬ሺͳሻ
operation. Same transitions for detecting communication faults. ௜ୀଵ
௡
Connections with one or more peer controllers can take place
due to network congestion or failure of the communication ܳ௡௘௧ ȁ௧ ൌ ෍൫݁ொ ܳ஼೔ ൯ ൌ Ͳ‫݌‬Ǥ ‫ݑ‬ሺʹሻ
circuit, leading to making a decision of removing missing ௜ୀଵ
controller’s DER from the directory of waiting for two more ܸ஻௨௦ ȁ௧ ൌ ݁௏ ܸ஼೔ ൌ ͳ‫݌‬Ǥ ‫ ݅ݑ‬ൌ ͳǡʹǡ ǥ ǡ ݊ሺ͵ሻ
cycles (Fig. 5) before assuming that the controller is down. If ‫ܨ‬஻௨௦ ȁ௧ ൌ ݁ி ‫ܨ‬஼೔ ൌ ͸Ͳ‫ ݅ݖܪ‬ൌ ͳǡʹǡ ǥ ǡ ݊ሺͶሻ
the distributed control system dedicated a local controller to the
PCC, connecting or disconnecting to the grid requires adding or Where ܲ௡௘௧ ǡ ܳ௡௘௧ are the net active and reactive power
removing that controller from the directory based on the respectively between generation and consumption at any given
microgrid mode of operation. time t. ܸ஻௨௦ ǡ ‫ܨ‬஻௨௦ are the bus reference voltage and frequency,
respectively. ݁௫ is the allowed mismatch factor to remain in
IV. COMMUNICATION NETWORK normal operation state.
One major issue considered as a future work for this paper
is the communication delays and their impact on the true
decentralized microgrid control operations. As shown in Figure
5a, the control cycle during normal operation of each controller
is divided in five main steps. Lengths of time slots in Figure 5
(a)
does not reflect the actual percentage of time during the cycle.
It is worth to note that receiving and broadcasting updates with
peer controllers include communication delays, these delays
can be interpreted as communication faults; which can lead to (b)
unnecessary controller state transition (Figure 4). For this study,
power component data are represented with the object model in
Table 1. Which is encapsulated into TCP\IP packet [2]. A study
that determines the best protocol that fits this system is a future Figure 5. (a) Control Cycle during normal operation. (b) Control Cycle
during state transitions (Fault handling).
work and beyond the scope of this paper.
 Microgrid data is monitored using a specially developed
Human Machine Interface (HMI). The control algorithm runs
based on the communication frequency configured at the
simulation side. The controller sends back commands to the
model including natural gas on/off commands and mode of
operation for the energy storage inverter.
As an example, Equation (5) represents unit commitment
function of natural gas generator with energy storage state of
charge (SOC) and total loads active power is
ି
ͳǡ ܱܵ‫ ܥ‬൏ ܱܵ‫ܥ‬௅  ‫ͳܩܰ ׫‬௖௠ௗ ൌͲ
ܰ‫ͳܩ‬ା
௖௠ௗ ൌ ൝ͳǡ ܱܵ‫ ܥ‬൏ ܱܵ‫ܥ‬ு  ‫ܲ ׫‬௅ை஺஽ ൐ ‫ܵܧ‬஼஺௉ ሺͷሻ
Ͳǡ ܱܵ‫ ܥ‬൒  ܱܵ‫ܥ‬ு

Where ܰ‫ͳܩ‬ା ௖௠ௗ is the start command to NG generator and

ܰ‫ିͳܩ‬ ௖௠ௗ is the current command. ܱܵ‫ܥ‬௅ , ܱܵ‫ܥ‬ு represent the
lower and the upper limits of SOC. ܲ௅ை஺஽ and ‫ܵܧ‬஼஺௉ are the
Figure 6. Laboratory HIL Platform Schematic. actual load active power consumption, and the energy storage
capacity, respectively. Only the designated controller
V. SYSTEM TESTING AND RESULTS (distributed) should be able to command the generator and its
breaker to close. This represents one of the major advantage for
A. Testing Platform the true decentralized control system over the centralized
For testing purposes, a Hardware-In-the-Loop (HIL) control architecture; as it alleviates the delay consequences in
platform [12] was developed to study microgrid operations with case of a fault by commanding the generator locally. Figure 7
real physical communication layer. Figure 6 shows the shows the lab setup for the HIL platform.
schematic of the platform applying the decentralized
C. Microgrid Operation Results
architecture shown in Fig. 2. A dedicated workstation running
microgrid simulation model. The workstation is equipped with For the proof-of-concept purposes, one scenario is
multi-Ethernet ports, binding the model with a dedicated introduced in this section. The microgrid operates in island
Ethernet port serves the purpose of avoiding impractical mode, the grid breaker is open, and the controller at the energy
network congestion with other network related traffic, i.e. storage maintains the voltage and frequency of the bus. Figure 8
Internet. PSCAD is an ideal candidate for our platform. The shows the active power curves captured during 130 seconds. The
simulator is widely used for multi-phase power systems and system simulation starts with fully charge ES, NG1, NG2 are off
control networks in time domain, and mainly dedicated to the and their breakers are open. The nature of the loads varies with
study of transients of power system, which is one of the future time starting with 60 KW and increasing. ES provides the power
aspects to study using the proposed platform. Accurate model to the loads for 16 seconds until the decentralized controller at
interaction between power system components and loads with
various control topologies is also a preferred feature in
simulation that is available in PSCAD.
Microgrid controls in this platform are developed using the
real-time module of the CompactRIO from National
Instruments. Its capability to run in real-time interface mode
serves the purpose of the platform. Additionally, CompactRIO
has the capability build and run the controller model in Fig. 3.
B. Microgrid Case Study
Fort sill microgrid [3] is modeled using PSCAD, with the
developed communication module integrated. Data is
aggregated and sent to the controller over TCP/IP connection.

Figure 8. Active power curves during islanded operation mode

Figure 7. Laboratory HIL Setup. and Energy Storage SOC curve.
 Figure 9. Voltage Curves during island operation mode.
the ES unit detects 60% SOC on remaining on the battery. As a
decentralized system and with general awareness condition is
maintained; DMGC of NG1 sends a command to NG1 to start
and synchronize with the bus, and commands the breaker after 6
seconds providing 190KW (full capacity). Noting the load
demand greater than the capacity of NG1, DMGC of NG2 goes
through the same operation and connects at t = 26s. The Battery
DMGC now detects that NG1 and NG2 are active, and starts
charging as demanded by the control algorithm.
It is worth to mention that the SOC of the energy storage is the
input to the control algorithm logic defined in equation (5)
resulting the command to NG. Figure 9 shows the voltage
curves provided by DMGCs of NG1 ES, Wind turbine,
compared to local sensing of MG bus voltage at the PCC.
Since the Virtual Droop Control algorithm [11] is applied to
this system, Figure 10 prooves the robustness of the algorithm
in regulating the frequency during this time period.
VI. CONCLUSIONS & FUTURE WORK
This paper introduces design and development of true
decentralized control architecture for microgrids. A true
decentralized system is explained compared to centralized
systems. Decentralization increases system reliability and may
minimize communication delay concerns as all control
commands are provided locally avoiding network complexity
and uncertainties. Proof-of-concept for the proposed
decentralized architecture is provided, a practical case study is
applied using a laboratory developed HIL platform. Future work
will include more operation scenarios including system
transients. Reliability analysis is to be performed supporting the
idea of eliminating the single-point-of failure. More
investigation on the impact of communication delay and
network uncertainties is essential for robust designs with the
variation of microgrid number of components and distributed
generation types.
REFERENCES
[1] E. Wood, “How Fast is the Microgrid Market Growing,”,
Microgrid Knowledge Newsletter [Online]. Available:
http://microgridknowledge.com. [Accessed: 12- 12- 2015].
Figure 10. Frequency curves of MG bus and the output of ES.
[2] A. Bani-Ahmed, L. Weber, A. Nasiri, H. Hosseini,”Microgrid
Communications: State of the Art and Future Trends”, 3rd
International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and
Applications, Milwaukee, ICRERA 2014.
[3] A. Solanki, A. Nasiri, V. Bhavaraju, T. Abdullah, D. Yu, “A New
Control Method for Microgrid Power Management”,
International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and
Applications. Oct. 2013, Madrid.
[4] R. H. Lasseter, P. Paigi, “MicroGrid: a conceptual solution” 35th
Annual IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, June
2004.
[5] C. Dou; M. Lv; T. Zhao; Y. Ji; H. Li, “Decentralised coordinated
control of microgrid based on multi-agent system,” in Generation,
Transmission & Distribution, IET , vol.9, no.16, pp.2474-2484,
2015.
[6] P. Li; T. Ma; Y. Tan, “An Architecture of MicroGrid Based on
Role on Autonomous Decentralized System,” in 10th
International Symposium on Autonomous Decentralized Systems
(ISADS), pp.429-434, March 2011
[7] C.M. Colson, M.H. Nehrir, R.W. Gunderson, "Distributed multi-
agent microgrids: a decentralized approach to resilient power
system self-healing," in 2011 4th International Symposium on
Resilient Control Systems (ISRCS), pp.83-88, 9-11 Aug. 2011.
[8] M. Bertocco, F. Tramarin, “A system architecture for distributed
monitoring and control in a Smart Microgrid,” in 2012 IEEE
Workshop on Environmental Energy and Structural Monitoring
Systems (EESMS), pp.24-31, Sept. 2012. doi:
10.1109/EESMS.2012.6348396
[9] Babazadeh, M.; Karimi, H., "Robust decentralized control for
islanded operation of a microgrid," in Power and Energy Society
General Meeting, 2011 IEEE, pp.1-8, July 2011.
[10] Niannian Cai; Mitra, J., "A decentralized control architecture for
a microgrid with power electronic interfaces," in North American
Power Symposium (NAPS), pp.1-8, Sept. 2010.
[11] A. Solanki, A. Nasiri, V. Bhavaraju, Y. L. Familiant and Q. Fu,
"A New Framework for Microgrid Management: Virtual Droop
Control," in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 7, no. 2, pp.
554-566, March 2016.
[12] A. Bani-Ahmed and A. Nasiri, "Development of real-time
hardware-in-the-loop platform for complex microgrids," 2015
International Conference on Renewable Energy Research and
Applications (ICRERA), pp. 994-998, Palermo, 2015