IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 3, NO.

1, MARCH 2012

253

The Load as an Energy Asset in a Distributed DC SmartGrid Architecture

Robert S. Balog, Senior Member, IEEE, Wayne W. Weaver, Member, IEEE, and Philip T. Krein, Fellow, IEEE
AbstractDC power systems can be made more reliable by considering the load as an important energy asset. Currently the ability to manage the total system is available only through a centralized controller, which limits exibility, recongurability, and reliability. These limitations can be avoided while still providing system level coordination through the use of distributed controls based on local information. All elements of the power system including source, loads, and the network itself have inuence, interaction, and coupling to all other elements. Therefore, it is necessary to model and control a microgrid as a system of systems that share some common aspects, such as voltage levels, but can operate independently. Using local information in the form of the bus voltage, these techniques do not rely on a centralized controller, which improves system reliability. However, it is important to design the microgrid in such a manner as to take advantage of the energy not just from the generation sources, but also the energy stored in the individual points-of-load as well. Index TermsDC-bus voltage control, microgrid, power distribution control, power distribution reliability, power electronics, power systems, recongurable architectures.

I. INTRODUCTION IRECT current power systems have long been the standard architecture for power distribution in many applications where reliability is critical, such as the telecommunications industry [1][5] and in naval ships where integrating and managing total system energy resources has led to new applications [6][12]. DC systems are also attractive for use in industrial systems [13][15], commercial buildings [16], [17], and residential applications [18][21] where sensitive loads benet from increased power quality and reliability [22], [23] which results in cost savings and increase in electrical conversion efciency [17]. DC systems also enable easier interconnection of alternative energy sources [24][26] since many of these sources, such as
Manuscript received April 10, 2011; revised July 03, 2011; accepted August 21, 2011. Date of publication October 31, 2011; date of current version February 23, 2012. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation and the Ofce of Naval Research under EPNES Grant ECS-0224829 and by the Grainger Center for Electric Machinery and Electromagnetics (CEME) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Paper no. TSG-00146-2011. R. S. Balog is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77845-3128 USA (e-mail: rbalog@ece.tamu.edu) W. W. Weaver is with the with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan Technological University, Houghton MI 49931-1295 USA (e-mail: wwweaver@mtu.edu) P. T. Krein is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 81601 USA (e-mail: krein@illinois.edu). Color versions of one or more of the gures in this paper are available online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TSG.2011.2167722

photovoltaic cells are natively dc sources. Modern high-frequency dc-dc converters enable efcient voltage conversion with power densities far greater than what is possible using 60 Hz ac [27]. Battery storage devices to improve the reliability and energy availability of distributed generation systems [24], [26], [28][35] also are easier to integrate into a dc system. While much of the recent interest in microgrids has largely focused on ac [36][38], they have several disadvantages including synchronization requirements for multiple small generation sources, reactive power ow, and circulating currents due to differences in voltage magnitude, phase angle, or dc offset in a multi-inverter system [36], [37], [39], [40]. These extra considerations, which represent operational constraints, are not present in dc microgrids which even include dc protection [42]. Thus, dc systems are a candidate for any application where reliability and power quality is of utmost importance [25], [41]. The paradigm shift from the common ac system to a dc system facilitates easier control of individual load performance and coordination, especially as energy allocation priorities change to match load priority requirements [43]. Such functionality is only available now through a central supervisory control. However, widespread use of such a system is hampered by drawbacks such as limited exibility, limited recongurability, and a single point of failure. Instead, load-side control based on the sensed bus voltage [24], [34] offers a distributed control that acts at each load, is modular, and contributes to overall system stability. The interconnection of a large number of high-bandwidth nonlinear dc power converters creates stability problems. Tight output voltage regulation causes a point-of-load (POL) converter to enforce constant load power. This results in negative dynamic input resistance which has a destabilizing effect on the system [44], especially during a voltage sag. In a large-signal sense, the bus voltage in a dc system can sag for a number of reasons including loss of generation or increase in load. Finite inertia dc systems are characteristically weak. Without spinning reserves or other stability mechanisms present in the ac terrestrial grid, such systems are subject to extreme voltage sags or even voltage collapse [45]. Many existing small-signal stability criterion and large-signal stabilization techniques require full system knowledge in the form of equivalent impedances and complete load-ow details. This paper proposes a bottom-up perspective in which distributed local controls operate at each POL converter, and use the information available in the bus voltage to infer the overall health of the system. In the event of a system transient such as loss of generation or a distribution fault, a power buffer local control utilizes the load as an energy asset. For short duration

1949-3053/$26.00 2011 IEEE

254

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 3, NO. 1, MARCH 2012

voltage sags, energy stored locally in the POL converter capacitor or the inertia of a rotating load can mitigate the effects of the negative dynamic load impedance. For long-term disturbances in which local energy is insufcient, a coordinated system based on local priority can help maintain system stability. During a catastrophic event, such as a re in a building, natural disaster in a microgrid community or battle damage in a naval ship, it is desirable for a dc distribution system to self-heal such that the unaffected components can still operate within an acceptable margin. Here, distributed control is critical since communication systems are likely to have been compromised. POL converters with distributed control intelligence eliminate reliance on a central controllerthereby eliminating a major single point of failure and supporting the self-healing process. In normal operation, local distributed controls can be augmented with limited low-bandwidth communication. The information provided in this way can enhance long-term system performance, but can be selected to avoid critical issues for system operation under transient conditions. Local controls that use local information improve system exibility, modularity, and reliability by operating in stand-alone mode if communication with the central agent is lost. It is expected that local controls that are locally stabilizing will contribute to overall system damping [43]. This paper focuses on the integration of power buffer control and dynamic priority-based load-shedding to support system operation through all types of disturbances, prevent voltage collapse, and support automatic recovery upon system stabilization. II. TRANSIENT TIME SCALES The concept of a power buffer has been shown in the literature to decouple the load from the bus dynamics [46], [47]. The rating of the local energy storage device provides the designer with a degree of freedom to choose the extent of the transients through which the load can be sustained. Once the local energy has been depleted, however, continued operation of the load is no longer possible. This gives rise to the notion of time scales based on the energy storage in the power buffer. A. Short-Term One method to maintain stability through short-term disturbances is to reduce the power to the loadappropriate for lighting or inertial loads [48] where the momentary slowing of a fan or dimming of a light is an acceptable alternative to system-wide instability. However, many modern electronic loads behave as and constant power loads rather than resistive loads and do not lend themselves to this power control technique [44]. A more general method is to implement an active dynamic buffer as shown in Fig. 1. These devices act as an interface that decouples the dynamics of the load from the system [46], [47]. In Fig. 1 the power buffer is operated as a boost converter and has several modes of operation. Note that other converter topologies can be utilized as long a local energy storage element such as a bus capacitor is present. During normal system operation, the power buffer supplies the load power from the bus. When a system transient occurs, the buffer senses the system voltage sag and presents constant impedance to the bus while continuing to supply the load with

Fig. 1. Power buffer.

Fig. 2. Sustaining time capability.

constant power. Since less power is drawn from the bus during the constant impedance mode, internal storage is required to maintain the power requirements of the load. After the transient passes, the buffer returns to a power regulation mode and draws additional incremental power to recharge the buffer capacitor. In effect, a power buffer stretches the time scale of the transient, diminishing the impact of tight converter regulation. A power buffer is limited by the amount of stored energy available in the bus capacitor. The time that a buffer can maintain constant input impedance while supplying the required load power is called its sustaining time and can be dened as (1) where is the nominal load voltage, is the nominal input voltage, is the sag voltage, and is the load power. The buffer design parameters in the sustaining time are (minimum allowable load voltage) and (energy storage capacity). A plot of sustaining time versus voltage sag for a buffer supplying a 100 W, 400 V load from a 100 V distribution system is shown in Fig. 2. As long as the voltage sag magnitude and duration falls above the curve, the given buffer can successfully ride through the transient while maintaining the load. If the transient event begins to approach the sustaining time limit, then the local load control needs to switch strategies to maintain stability. B. Long-Term System transients that exceed the sustaining time of the power buffer (or that are caused by topological failures such as loss of generation or a bus fault) require an alternative technique to mitigate system instability. In these cases, the only long-term strategy to stabilize an energy-constrained dc system is loadshed.

BALOG et al.: THE LOAD AS AN ENERGY ASSET IN A DISTRIBUTED DC SMARTGRID ARCHITECTURE

255

TABLE I LOAD PRIORITY-ASSIGNMENT EXAMPLE FOR A NAVAL SYSTEM.

Fig. 3. P-V curves for cascading system failure.

In practice dc-dc regulators have minimum allowable input voltages that prevent them from operating as true constant power loads. As the system bus voltage decreases due to increased loading or loss of generation, these converters will turn off to self-protect as the bus voltage decreases below this specied voltage limit. Fig. 3 is an illustration of a family of P-V curves resulting from topological changes in the dc system. At time , generation loss causes the system operating point to jump to a new P-V curve, this results in a lower bus voltage. Under voltage protection (UVP) within each converter turns off some loads, allowing the bus voltage to increase. At time another failure results in further UVP load shed. In a radial system, such as the Naval Combat Survivability testbed [49], the voltage drop along the bus due to bus impedance automatically gives rise to a notion of priority to the loads located closest to the source and with the highest voltage. Thus, the rst converters shed in Fig. 3 due to UVP are the ones physically farthest from the source. In general, it is not desirable that the topology dictate priority. Instead, a supervisor control at each POL converter can monitor the bus voltage and turn off the converter based on a preprogrammed priority setting. Mapping the priority setting to a particular bus voltage will force loads with the lowest desired priority to be shed rst and allow higher priority loads to remain active, regardless of location in the system. Thus system operation is decoupled from the topology of the system. A similar technique has been proposed for ring-bus architectures [13].

systems such as weapons and propulsion under general quarters status. If local energy is available in a power buffer, load priority can be used to determine if the load simply turns off or the power buffer operates when trouble is sensed on the dc bus. Although Table I illustrates the concept for a Naval Shipboard power system application, similar load-priority schedules could be created for any dc smartgrid application such as an ofce building, campus park, etc. Fine-tuning the performance of the system requires that each POL converter has some information about the entire system. Low-bandwidth communication from the command and control center broadcasts the current state of the system, but each POL converter ultimately decides how to use the informationunlike in a centralized control scheme where each load is directly controlled. The distributed control strategy is inherently faulttolerant, because each controller acts independently. If the lowbandwidth communication is compromised, each controller can continue to operation using the last-known state, or revert to fail-safe operation as determined by the load-priority table. IV. NATURE OF THE DISTURBANCE System changes due to load, generation, or topological change are observed in the bus voltage. These changes can occur at different rates of time and are conveniently divided into three categories: step, low-frequency, and high-frequency. The nature of the transient event and the priority of the load determine the best controller response. Step-events occur when the bus dc voltage changes suddenly, such as when loads are added or removed or the power drawn by a load changes precipitously. The new system is assumed to be sufciently damped with a stable operating point. Low-frequency events include system-wide oscillations and slowly changing voltage proles. Low-frequency bus oscillations may be the result of excitation of a resonant frequency, an under-damped response, or chattering as multiple converters interact. High-frequency events are characterized by a high dv/dt bus voltage. Additionally, the frequency and total number of transient events can provide valuable knowledge of the systems health. V. LOCAL-CONTROL STRATEGY Control strategy for each POL bus interface when the system is stressed depends on the load priority. High priority loads are required to continue operation while lower priority loads can be turned off to preserve the systems voltage stability. A power buffer on the higher priority loads eases the burden on the bus by presenting constant input impedance instead of a constant power load during a buffering event. In this mode, current is still

III. LOAD PRIORITIZATION AND SCHEDULING In an energy-constrained system, load prioritization is critical for system stability and control, because it provides a structured approach to the decision and control process. It is likely that a particular priority will change depending on the operation of the entire system. A general framework for organizing the load priorities is a two-dimensional matrix as shown in Table I for a naval shipboard power system application. Propulsion is typically the highest energy priority while domestic loads such as lighting in crew quarters and galley power is the most easily sacriced depending on the threat level. In another example, the launch equipment for lifeboats might have a higher priority under Patrol status for safety reasons but yield priority to other

256

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 3, NO. 1, MARCH 2012

Fig. 4. Local control strategy for each POL supervisor.

drawn from the bus and internal energy storage satises the load requirements. Fig. 4 illustrates the decision logic for a complete POL power unit. During normal operation, the buffer transfers the load power demand from the bus, while maintaining its internal energy storage. This mode completely couples the load and bus dynamics. When the bus experiences a transient that triggers a protection event, load priority determines the course of action to maintain system stability. The highest priority loads remain connected to the bus until the energy is depleted. Lesser priority loads continue to monitor the bus and disconnect if the bus is sensed to become worse according to some metric. For high priority buffer loads the wellbeing of the load is favored, therefore the buffer will attempt to maintain the load until its internal energy storage is depleted, while presenting a constant input impedance to the bus. When the internal energy reaches a given set-point, the POL switches to a loadshed strategy. For a medium priority buffer load, the loads welfare is favored less. Throughout a protection event, the input impedance remains constant, while stored energy supplements the load power. However, if during the protection event, the bus condition becomes worse, the strategy is switched to a load shed. When the bus recovers from a transient, the high and medium priority buffers change to replenish energy storage mode in anticipation of the next event. While drawing full load power from the bus to supply the needs of the load, additional power is

drawn to recharge the buffer energy storage capacitor. If during the replenish cycle the bus experiences another transient, then the buffer re-enters a constant input impedance mode. Since the replenish cycle was interrupted, the sustaining time for the latest transient will be diminished as there is less stored energy. If the replenish cycle nishes uninterrupted by a bus transient, then the buffer returns to normal operation. When the load is low priority, or the buffer energy storage has been depleted in a high or medium buffer, load shed is implemented. This entails shutting down the load in a manner that will cause the least inconvenience for startup, and minimize the impact on the load. The strategy is a function of the nature of the load. When the protection event has cleared, a load-appropriate startup strategy is implemented. To minimize the chance of triggering further system transients, the bus power to the load should be minimized during startup, so-called soft-start. When the load is high priority, power is immediately delivered to the load. When a low or medium priority load is started, the buffer energy storage capacitor is precharged before turning on the load. During startup, load priority determines if the load is immediately connected or if the power buffer starts up rst. Highest priority loads immediately connect to the bus while lower priority loads rst allow their power buffer to soft-start, eliminating inrush current and gracefully loading the bus with an initial constant impedance to help stabilize the system. After a time, the power buffer will revert to normal operation. If a

BALOG et al.: THE LOAD AS AN ENERGY ASSET IN A DISTRIBUTED DC SMARTGRID ARCHITECTURE

257

Fig. 5. Experimental results of a fault condition. (a) Unbuffered. (b) Buffered.

Fig. 6. Startup inrush operation.

bus transient occurs during charging of the buffer, then the charging cycle ends until the bus returns to its nominal state. VI. EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS A. Power Buffering An experimental circuit was constructed as shown in Fig. 1, with a dc-dc buck converter the POL converter. The POL has a voltage feedback loop that enforces constant-power load from the buffer. The bus is represented by a Thevenin equivalent 10 V supply and a resistance . To create a voltage event in the power system, was increased from to at 5.2 s and reduced to at 5.35 s, decreasing the maximum power transfer capability of the power supply. This system was operated with a standard high gain PI gain control system that demonstrates the un-buffered operation in Fig. 5(a). In Fig. 5(b) the control system implemented the power buffer concept by changing from constant-power mode to constant-impedance mode when the bus voltage began to sag. When the fault cleared and the bus voltage returned to its normal operating point, the buffer returned to constant-power mode and recovered the lost capacitor energy. Although the power demanded by the load exceeded the bus power transfer capability, by using a power buffer, a voltage collapse was avoided without interruption of constant load power. B. Inrush Current Protection Inrush current is a signicant concern in a dc system. Many of the traditional methods used to limit this current result in increased steady-state losses or require large dc contactors. The power buffer in Fig. 1 provides an alternative approach by programming the initial input impedance to soft-start the load and precharge the buffer capacitor. Once charged, the buffer capacitor supplies the inrush current as the load turns on. To illustrate a POL soft-start, a simulation of the circuit shown in Fig. 1 was carried out with results shown in Fig. 6. Two simulation results are shown, one with the buffer and one without. In both cases the load is constant power with a damped second-order input lter. The unbuffered case experiences a large initial inrush current of

3.7 pu, limited only by parasitic impedances. This large inrush current can stress a weak bus and damage the POL equipment. For the buffered case, the power buffer rst begins a precharge period when the bus is energized at time 0 s. During precharge, the input resistance to the buffer is reduced exponentially to charge the internal capacitor and smoothly ramp up current drawn from the bus. This ramped current draw avoids a large inrush current. The precharge cycle is controlled by three design parameters: the initial impedance, nal impedance and the time constant of the exponential, which are 10 pu, 2 pu, and 100 ms, respectively. The buffer capacitance continues to charge until a target capacitor voltage of 1 pu is achieved (at 280 ms in the gure) at which point power is turned on to the load. During the constant power load startup, some storage capacitor energy is used to supplement the power requirements of the load while the buffer matches its input impedance to the load. This load-starting period is a design parameter that is set for 30 ms. At 340 ms the buffer draws extra current to replace the energy lost during the initial load start. The buffered precharge avoids excessive inrush current at the cost of delaying the startup of the load. Ultimately, the choice to operate in this start-up regime will depend on the priority of the load. C. Priority-Dictated Load Shed in a Radial DC Bus The voltage drop along a radial dc bus automatically gives rise to a notion of priority, based on the POL location and undervoltage trip point. Allowing the system designer to specify the minimum operating voltage of a particular converter decouples the converter priority from its topological location. Consider the 48 V, radial three-bus system in Fig. 7 initially in steady state supplying 125 W to each load. Each POL converter is specied to operate with a minimum input voltage of 90% nominal, or 43.2 V. In any radial system, the voltage decreases as distance from the source increases due to the impedance of the bus. Thus the POL converters farthest from the source would be the rst to trip ofine due to under voltage. At 2.0 s, the load on POL converter 1 step-increases to 500 W and then at 3.0 s the load on POL converter 3 step-increases to 250 W. At each event the bus voltage sags due to increased bus losses, as shown in Fig. 8. After the input-lter dynamics subside at 3.0 s, the bus voltages

258

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 3, NO. 1, MARCH 2012

Fig. 7. Example of a radial dc system. Fig. 9. POL converter 2 is shed following the step-change of POL converter 1 at 2.0 s, to allow higher priority loads 1 and 3 to remain active. As additional load is added to the system at 3.0 s, converter 1 is also shed to preserve system stability and allow the highest priority load 3 to remain active.

TABLE II PRIORITY-BASED UNDER-VOLTAGE SET-POINT EXAMPLE.

Fig. 8. Three bus system progressively loaded.

at POL converters 2 and 3 are now below the minimum specied input voltage and will ultimately trip ofine to self-protect (not shown). Further, the controller allows each converter set-points to be chosen such that the load is shed according to a priority schedule. In Fig. 9, voltage collapse is mitigated by shedding lower priority loads as the voltage collapses. As total system loading increases and the bus voltage drops, load is shed in order of the preprogrammed priority shown in Table II. Fig. 4 illustrates that if a load is shed, it can be reactivated using the power buffer circuitry and controls to gradually load the bus is a soft-start manner to initially precharge the energy storage capacitor while the controls are monitoring the bus voltage. While state-dependent switching is well known to have the potential for destabilizing a system, dwell time has been showed to prevent instability by limiting how quickly consecutive switching events can occur, allowing transients to subside before a new switching condition is evaluated [50]. VII. CONCLUSIONS The move to dc distribution in future power systems facilitates greater integration and management of total system resources. By considering the load as an energy resource, greater

exibility in the operation of the nite energy system is possible. During a time of stress on the system such as transient disturbances from pulse-power loads or catastrophic failure resulting from a torpedo strike in a shipboard power system, load prioritization provides a structured approach to the decision and control process. This paper has presented a strategy for local control in a dc distribution system that integrates two techniques: power buffering and load shedding. The power buffer is best suited for short-term system transients and allows continued operation of the load through the transient, whereas load-shed is effective when the transients are long-term or when turning off the load during the transient is not prohibited. Although the control scheme operates locally, using local information, it has a stabilizing effect on the entire system. Future work includes investigating a bidirectional power buffer and the response of the local controller to a more complete set of bus disturbances. It is expected that a bidirectional power buffer can use the internal energy storage to mitigate disturbances on the bus so that during a severe transient, energy from a capacitive or inertial load could be injected back onto the bus for added voltage support and small-signal stabilization. REFERENCES
[1] S. Roy, Reliability considerations for data centers power architectures, in Proc. IEEE Int. Telecommun. Energy Conf. (INTELEC), Edinburgh, U.K., 2001, pp. 406411. [2] K. Mistry, E. Silverman, T. Taylor, and R. Willis, Telecommunications power architectures: Distributed or centralized, in Proc. IEEE Int. Telecommun. Energy Conf. (INTELEC), Florence, Italy, Oct. 1518, 1989, vol. 1, p. 10.1.

BALOG et al.: THE LOAD AS AN ENERGY ASSET IN A DISTRIBUTED DC SMARTGRID ARCHITECTURE

259

[3] A. Kwasinski and P. T. Krein, A microgrid-based telecom power system using modular multiple-input DC-DC converters, in IEEE Int. Telecommun. Conf. (INTELEC), Sep. 2005, pp. 515520. [4] T. M. Gruzs and J. Hall, AC, DC or hybrid power solutions for todays telecommunications facilities, in Proc. IEEE Int. Telecommun. Energy Conf. (INTELEC), 2000, pp. 361368. [5] F. Bodi, DC-grade reliability for ups in telecommunications data centers, in IEEE Telecommun. Energy Conf. (INTELEC), 2007, pp. 595602. [6] A future naval capability: Electric warships & combat vehicles, Ofce of Naval Research [Online]. Available: http://www.onr.navy.mil/ fncs [7] ONR/NSF EPNES control challenge problem, [Online]. Available: http://www.usna.edu/EPNES [8] D. H. Clayton, S. D. Sudhoff, and G. F. Grater, Electric ship drive and power system, in Rec. IEEE Int. Power Modulator Symp., Norfolk, VA, pp. 8588. [9] H. Hegner and B. Desai, Integrated ght through power, in Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Summer Meet., vol. 1, pp. 336339. [10] E. L. Zivi, Integrated shipboard power and automation control challenge problem, in Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Transm. Distrib. Conf., Chicago, IL, vol. 1, pp. 325330. [11] M. E. Baran and N. Mahajan, System reconguration on shipboard DC zonal electrical system, in Proc. IEEE Electric Ship Technol. Symp., 2005, pp. 8692. [12] A. Monti et al., Ship power system control: A technology assessment, in Proc. IEEE Electric Ship Technol. Symp. (ESTS), 2005, pp. 292297. [13] B. K. Johnson and R. Lasseter, An industrial power distribution system featuring ups properties, in Rec. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf. (PESC), pp. 759765. [14] W. Tang and R. H. Lasseter, An Lvdc industrial power distribution system without central control unit, in Rec. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., vol. 2, pp. 979984. [15] M. E. Baran and N. R. Mahajan, DC distribution for industrial systems: Opportunities and challenges, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 15961601, Nov.Dec. 2003. [16] A. Sannino, G. Postiglione, and M. H. J. Bollen, Feasibility of a DC network for commercial facilities, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. Conf., 2002, vol. 3, pp. 17101717. [17] D. Salomonsson and A. Sannino, Low-voltage DC distribution system for commercial power systems with sensitive electronic loads, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 16201627, Jul. 2007. [18] H. Kakigano et al., Fundamental characteristics of DC microgrid for residential houses with cogeneration system in each house, in IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meet.Convers. Del. of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, Pittsburgh, PA, Jul. 2024, 2008, pp. 18. [19] H. Kakigano, M. Nomura, and T. Ise, Loss evaluation of DC distribution for residential houses compared with AC system, in Proc. 2010 Int. Power Electron. Conf. (IPEC), Jun. 2124, 2010, pp. 480486. [20] H. Kakigano, Y. Miura, and T. Ise, Conguration and control of a DC microgrid for residential houses, in Proc. Transm. Distrib. Conf. Expo.: Asia Pacic, Oct. 2630, 2009, pp. 14. [21] H. Kakigano et al., Fundamental characteristics of DC microgrid for residential houses with cogeneration system in each house, in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meet.Convers. Del. Electr. Energy 21st Century, Jul. 2024, 2008, pp. 18. [22] D. Salomonsson, L. Soder, and A. Sannino, Protection of low-voltage DC microgrids, IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 10451053, Jul. 2009. [23] H. Kakigano, Y. Miura, T. Ise, and R. Uchida, DC micro-grid for super high quality distributionsystem conguration and control of distributed generations and energy storage devices, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., Jun. 1822, 2006, pp. 17. [24] K. Sun, L. Zhang, Y. Xing, and J. Guerrero, A distributed control strategy based on DC bus signaling for modular photovoltaic generation systems with battery energy storage, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 10, pp. 30323045, Oct. 2011. [25] M. Saeedifard, M. Graovac, R. F. Dias, and R. Iravani, DC power systems: Challenges and opportunities, in Proc. 2010 IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meet., pp. 17. [26] B. Panajotovic and B. Odadzic, Design and inteligent control of hybrid power system in telecommunication, in Proc. IEEE Mediterranean Electrotech. Conf. (MELECON), 2010, pp. 14531458. [27] I. Batarseh, Power Electronic Circuits. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, 2004.

[28] P. Karlsson, DC distributed power systemsAnalysis, design, and control for a renewable energy system, Ph.D, Industrial Electrical Engineering, Lund Univ., Lund, Sweden, 2002. [29] Y. Hu, J. Tatler, and Z. Chen, A bidirectional DC/DC power electronic converter for an energy storage device in an autonomous power system, in Proc. Int. Power Electron. Motion Control Conf., Xian, China, Aug. 1416, 2004, vol. 1, pp. 171176. [30] G. Brown, M. Carlyle, and J. Salmeron, Defending critical infrastructure. Monterey, Ca, Operations Research Department, Naval Postgraduate School, 2005 [Online]. Available: http://www.nps.navy.mil/ orfacpag/resumePages/papers/BrownEtAlCIP05.pdf [31] Z. Qianzhi and Y. Defang, Prediction on future DC power system, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Motion Control Conf., May 2009, pp. 11921195. [32] R. Magureanu, M. Albu, A. M. Dumitrescu, and M. Priboianu, A practical solution for grid connected dispersed generation from renewable sources: DC connection, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron., Electr. Drives, Automation, Motion, May 2006, pp. 12281231. [33] J. Schonberger, R. Duke, and S. D. Round, DC-bus signaling: A distributed control strategy for a hybrid renewable nanogrid, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 14531460, Oct. 2006. [34] T. L. Vandoorn et al., Power Balancing in Islanded Microgrids by Using a dc-Bus Voltage Reference, in Proc. Int. Symp. Power Electron. Electrical Drives Automation, Motion (SPEEDAM), 2010, pp. 884889. [35] H. Kakigano, A. Nishino, Y. Miura, and T. Ise, Distribution voltage control for DC microgrid by converters of energy storages considering the stored energy, in Proc. IEEE Energy Convers. Congr. Expo. (ECCE), Sep. 1216, 2010, pp. 28512856. [36] Y. Mohamed and E. F. El-Saadany, Adaptive decentralized droop controller to preserve power sharing stability of paralleled inverters in distributed generation microgrids, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 28062816, Nov. 2008. [37] L. Y. Wei and K. Ching-Nan, An accurate power control strategy for power-electronics-interfaced distributed generation units operating in a low-voltage multibus microgrid, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 29772988, Dec. 2009. [38] E. Barklund et al., Energy management in autonomous microgrid using stability-constrained droop control of inverters, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 23462352, Sep. 2008. [39] J. M. Guerrero et al., Hierarchical control of droop-controlled AC and DC microgridsa general approach towards standardization, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. PP, no. 99, p. 1, 2010. [40] S. V. Iyer, M. N. Belur, and M. C. Chandorkar, Analysis and mitigation of voltage offsets in multi-inverter microgrids, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 354363, Mar. 2011. [41] H. Kakigano, Y. Miura, and T. Ise, Low voltage bipolar type DC microgrid for super high quality distribution, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 30663075, Nov.Dec. 2010. [42] R. M. Cuzner and G. Venkataramanan, The status of DC micro-grid protection, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc. Annu. Meet., Edmonton, AB, Canada, 2008, pp. 18. [43] W. W. Weaver, Dynamic energy resource control of power electronics in local area power networks, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 852859, Mar. 2011. [44] R. D. Middlebrook, Input lter considerations in design and application of switching regulators, in Rec. IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc. Annu. Meet., 1976, pp. 366382. [45] A. Kwasinski and C. N. Onwuchekwa, Effects of instantaneous constant-power loads on DC micro-grids for sustainable power systems, in Proc. IEEE Int. Power Electron. Conf. (IPEC), Jun. 2124, 2010, pp. 862869. [46] D. L. Logue and P. T. Krein, Preventing instability in DC distribution systems by using power buffering, in Rec. IEEE Power Electron. Specialist Conf., vol. 1, pp. 3337. [47] W. W. Weaver and P. T. Krein, Mitigation of power system collapse through active dyanamic buffers, in Rec. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., Aachen, Germany, vol. 2, pp. 10801084. [48] A. Van Zyl, R. Spee, A. Faveluke, and S. Bhowmik, Voltage sag ridethrough for adjustable-speed drives with active rectiers, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 12701277, Nov.Dec. 1998. [49] S. Pekarek et al., Development of a testbed for design and evaluation of power electronic based systems, in Proc. Soc. Automotive Eng. Power Syst. Conf., Coral Springs, FL, 2002, p. 2002-01-3238. [50] R. S. Balog and P. T. Krein, Bus selection in multibus DC microgrids, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 860867, Mar. 2011.

260

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 3, NO. 1, MARCH 2012

Robert S. Balog (S92M96SM07) received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering from Rutgers, New Brunswick, NJ, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana. He was an Engineer with Lutron Electronics, Coopersburg, PA, from 1996 to 1999, a Researcher with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Engineering Research and Development Center (ERDEC), Construction Engingeering Research Lab (CERL), Champaign, IL from 2005 to 2006, a Senior Engineer at SolarBridge Technologies, Champaign, IL, from 2006 to 2009, then joined Texas A&M University, College Station, where he is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. He holds 11 issued and pending U.S. patent. His current research interests include power converters for solar energy, particularly microinverters for ac photovoltaic (ACPV) modules, and highly reliable electrical power and energy systems including dc microgrids. Dr. Balog is a Registered Professional Engineer in Illinois. He received the IEEE Joseph J. Suozzi INTELEC Fellowship in Power Electronics in 2001. He is a member of Eta Kappa Nu, Sigma Xi, the National Society of Professional Engineers, the American Solar Energy Society and the Solar Electric Power Association.He is a member in the External Public Body of the Hungarian Academy of Science. He is the 2011 recipient of the Rutgers University, College of Engineering Distinguished Engineer award.

neering Research Lab (CERL), Champaign, IL, on distributed and renewable energy technology research. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the department of Electrical Engineering at Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI. Dr. Weaver is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Illinois.

Wayne W. Weaver (S03M08) received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering and the B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from GMI Engineering & Management Institute, Flint, MI, in 1997 and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Illinois, Urbana. He was a Research and Design Engineer at Caterpillar Inc., Peoria, IL, from 1997 to 2003. From 2006 to 2008 he also worked as a Researcher at the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Engineering Research and Development Center (ERDC), Construction Engi-

Philip T. Krein (S76M82SM93F00) received the B.S. degree in electrical engineering and the A.B. degree in economics and business from Lafayette College, Easton, PA, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Illinois, Urbana. He was an Engineer with Tektronix in Beaverton, OR, then returned to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. At present, he holds the Grainger Endowed Directors Chair in Electric Machinery and Electromechanics as Professor and Director of the Grainger Center for Electric Machinery and Electromechanics. His research interests address all aspects of power electronics, machines, drives, and electrical energy, with emphasis on nonlinear control and distributed systems. He published an undergraduate textbook, Elements of Power Electronics (Oxford Univ. Press, 1998). In 2001, he helped initiate the International Future Energy Challenge, a major student competition involving fuel cell power conversion and energy efciency. He holds 15 U.S. patents with additional patents pending. Dr. Krein is a Registered Professional Engineer in Illinois and in Oregon. He was a senior Fulbright Scholar at the University of Surrey in the United Kingdom in 199798, and was recognized as a University Scholar in 1999, the highest research award at the University of Illinois. He serves as Academic Advisor for the Department of Electronic and Information Engineering at Hong Kong Polytechnic University. In 2003, he received the IEEE William E. Newell Award in Power Electronics. He is a past President of the IEEE Power Electronics Society, and served as a member of the IEEE Board of Directors. In 20052007, he was a Distinguished Lecturer for the IEEE Power Electronics Society. In 2008, he received the Distinguished Service Award from the IEEE Power Electronics Society. He is Chairman of the Board of SolarBridge Technologies, a developer of long-life integrated solar energy systems.