This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
Supervisory Power Quality Control Scheme
for a Grid-Off Microgrid
Hee-Sang Ko, Moon-Suk Jang, Kyung-Sang Ryu, Dae-Jin Kim, Byung-Ki Kim
Energy Convergence Laboratory
Korea Institute of Energy Research
Jeju, Korea
heesangko@kier.re.kr
Abstract—Microgrids based on renewable energy sources are
presently requires proper control functions to meet of power
quality requirement in the distribution system. In order to
maintain the power generation/consumption balance and
necessary for stable functioning such as voltage and frequency of
microgrid, the power systems traditionally utilize necessary
control actions. However, the present practice requires the
independent power producers and/or developers who want to
build a micrgrid for stable operation in both grid-off modes and
grid-tie modes. Therefore, this paper proposes an innovative
supervisory power quality control scheme of a grid-off microgrid,
especially voltage and frequency control objectives, at a given
location. In doing so, the active and reactive power are
manipulated from the power conversion systems with taking into
account their operating states and limits.
Keywords—Microgrid, supervisory control, voltage control,
fequency control, power distribuiton, power quality
I. INTRODUCTION
As a microgrid control scheme, the hierarchical control
schemes such as primary control, secondary control and
tertiary control, are introduced about voltage/frequency
regulation, power balance and load sharing [1]. The
decentralized droop-based control method also presents as a
primary control option without requiring communication
infrastructure [2]. However, these presented control schemes
exhibit the limitations as follows:
• still noticed of frequency and voltage deviations from
the rated values in a steady-state condition [3],
• still noticed an inaccurate reactive power sharing
among distributed generation (DG) units due to the line
voltage drops [4].
To overcome such limitations is described in the
centralized secondary control, which requires bidirectional
communication links between the central control unit and each
DG unit [1], [3], [5]-[11]. However, the presented secondary
control schemes still do not address and/or report the
limitations of zero-error voltage and frequency regulations
[12]. In addition, even though practical low voltage microgrid
systems must consider line impedances in the system model
for an accurate analysis, the presented researches neglect the
impact of such parameters [13], [14].
Motivated by the aforementioned limitations, this paper
presents an innovative supervisory power control
methodology for a grid-off microgrid about voltage and
frequency control at a specified location, i.e., point of common
1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
coupling (PCC) of a grid-off microgird. The proposed
approach considers that each DG unit may have somewhat
different instantaneous active/reactive power outputs due to its
state of energy source availability and its contribution level to
load consumption. Therefore, different available amounts of
active and reactive power are expected for achieving the main
control objectives. The operating limits of each DG unit are
also considered to ensure that all power converters operate in
the stable operating region. In this paper, the main
consideration in the simulation environment is as follows:
• System Coordinates
The models have generally been developed in the
synchronous reference frame d-q coordinates. However, there
are several disadvantages of this approach. Firstly, this
approach assumes that loads, supply grids and models are
perfectly balanced three-phase systems. A load however, is
typically a series of single-phase loads distributed among the
three-phases and it cannot therefore be guaranteed that the
load will be perfectly balanced, especially in a microgrid. Also,
a load is not necessarily a linear load and can very easily have
a high distortion or harmonic content. Therefore, in this paper,
models in abc-coordinates are used.
• PLL (Phase locked loop)
It is a realistic approach and in practice, the frequency
must be measured and PLLs are used for this. PLLs have their
response and characteristics and these characteristics are
important in simulation models as well as in control strategies.
Also, d-q to a-b-c and a-b-c to d-q coordinate transformations
are required for controlling various models (e.g. the 3-phase
inverter model) and PLLs are required to determine the angle.
• Controller
A controller output limitation method to selectively
realize the desired control objective, taking into account also
the line impedances in the model.
This paper is organized as follows: the system description
is explained in Section II. In Section III, the supervisory
power quality control scheme are described. In Section IV, the
simulations results are presented. The conclusion is finally
drawn in Section V.
II. SYSTEM DESCRIPTIONS
A. System Configuration
The proposed system as shown in Fig. 1 consists of the
battery storage system (BSS) branch and photovoltaic system
(PVS) branch, and a load branch, which is consisted with a
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy

power factor compensator (PFC) and the consumer load. As a
traditional power quality control, the BSS is used for the
voltage and frequency control while the PVS is functioned to
provide supplementary active power for a load variation and
charging of the BSS. Thus, the BSS is designed with a bi-
directional power inverter model for charging and discharging
the active power. The PVS branch is consisted with an
intermediate DC-DC converter to provide a higher flexibility
in selecting the PV array configuration and DC-AC inverter.
The battery system can be traditionally used to charge the
battery when excessive energy is available (solar irradiation)
using the bi-directional inverter and to discharge the battery
when there is a need for additional energy on the microgrid.
The battery system can also regulate the reactive power.
The PVS generally supplies the active power determined
by a maximum power point tracking (MPPT) control
regulation together with the back-to-back converter depending
upon the amount of solar irradiation falling on the PV array.
B. Point of Common Coupling (PCC)
The PCC is the interface between the various branches. The
PCC is not necessary to perform individual branch simulations;
however, it is intended to be used when more than one branch
is used and they are to be connected together in a simulation. In
this paper, the PCC is represented by the line impedance (RL).
C. Load Branch
The load branch consists of the consumer loads (a linear
resistive/inductive load) and PFC.
D. Battery Storage System (BSS)
The BSS, using a bi-directional static inverter connected to
the battery with its associated controls is modeled [17], [18].

Fig. 3. Battery storage system (BSS) branches.

1) Battery model
The battery model as based upon the Randle’s model
with the modification that the resistance.

Fig. 1. The structure of the proposed microgrid.

Fig. 4. Battery equivalent circuit model.
Fig. 2 shows the input-output relation of the branches
shown in Fig. 1. In Fig. 2, the Qcbss and Qcpvs are to utilize the 2) Battery storage system controller
reactive power for a voltage control. And, Pcbss is for the Fig. 5 shows the overall BSS control scheme and Fig. 6
frequency control by utilizing the active power. describes the battery system controller.

Fig. 2. Input-Output relation of each branches

In the configuration of the model, several conventions are

followed and certain notations are used. Firstly, the flow of
active and reactive power in diagrams is defined to be positive
when flowing out of a source or given branch and into a
consumer load. Therefore, current flowing into the consumer
load is defined to be positive and consequently, the active and
reactive powers flowing or being dissipated in a given load
will be positive.
The dynamic model is developed and demonstrated at a
simulation frequency of 50kHz to realize a real-time
simulation with average models [15], [16] of the power
converters only.
Fig. 5. BSS control scheme.

1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy

Fig. 7. Photovoltaic system (PVS) branches.

1) PV cell model
The equivalent circuit used in this model is the one-diode
model with shunt and series resistance [19]. Although the two-
diode model is considered to be more accurate, it is only so if
the model parameters are accurately determined [19]. Due to
this fact, the widely-accepted one-diode model is selected here.
2) PVS control
The PVS controller controls the DC-DC converter and
inverter models operating under a solar array. The DC-DC
converter is to regulate intermediate DC voltage fed to the
three-phase inverter model. The active power output of the
inverter is controlled using a constant voltage MPPT
technique by regulating the output voltage of the PV array.
The reactive power of the inverter is controlled to the level of
reactive power required to contribute a voltage regulate.
The DC-DC converter is controlled in average current mode
control [15], [16] and it regulates its output voltage, which is
the input voltage to the inverter. The inverter d-component is
controlled by regulating the active power supplied by the
Fig. 6. Battery system control.
inverter into the microgrid according to its constant voltage
level for MPPT regulation. The q-component compensator
The BSS controller manages the discharge and charging of the
regulates the reactive power exchanged with the inverter and
battery by controlling the bi-directional three-phase inverter
the microgrid
model. The d-component PI (Proportional-Integral)
compensator regulates the active power level. The q-
component regulator regulates the reactive power exchanged
with the BSS branch.
E. Photovoltaic System (PVS)
The PVS branch consists of models of a PV array, DC-DC
converter, three-phase inverter, transformer and the associated
controls [19]-[21]. The DC-DC converter is included to
provide greater flexibilities as follows:
• Individual DC-DC converters can be used for various
parts of the PV array, each with their own localized
MPPT control for better efficiency during shading.
• The voltage range of the PV array itself can be much
more flexibly set, optimizing the number of PV
modules required.
• The DC-DC converters can be connected in series or
parallel at their outputs to have the optimized input
voltage to the inverter.
• A separate DC-DC converter for the MPPT control and
the inverter, which performs grid-tie alone.
• Better redundancy of the PV array where sections can
be easily isolated during faults.

Fig. 8. PVS control scheme.

1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
Fig. 9. PV system control.
F. Phase Locked Loop (PLL)
The Single-Order Generalized Integrator (SOGI) PLL is
modeled, which provides better PLL performance especially
unbalanced or distorted conditions [22].
G. Power factor compensator (PFC)
This three-phase reactive power compensator with current
input is a model of delta-connected power factor
compensation capacitors [23]. This block has a current input
and produces the voltage at the compensating capacitor
terminals. It can be used together with blocks producing a
current output (voltage-controlled current sources). The three-
phase reactive power compensator controller determines the
required setting of a reactive power compensator block based
upon the measured power. It is assumed that the power factor
should be compensated to be close to unity.
Fig. 10. Power factor compensator schematic (voltage input)
1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
III. SUPERVISORY POWER QUALITY CONTROL SCHEME
This section presents an innovative supervisory power
quality control scheme that does not require installation of
additional compensating devices and is applicable to microgrid
of different configurations. The control regulates the
voltage/frequency at a specified location PCC by adjusting the
active/reactive power produced by the power conversion
systems of each DG, considering its operating limits.
In a realistic microgrid, each DG may have somewhat
different instantaneous output of active/reactive power due to
the state of energy source availabilities and load variations.
Consequently, the availability of active/reactive power
generation from the power conversion systems also different.
Fig. 11. Voltage control methodology.
In Fig. 11, the △Qcont in Step 1 is the required the reactive
power from the voltage controller to regulate the voltage at the
PCC. Assuming a proportional distribution in Step 3 where
n is the total number of DG units, the portion of reactive power
to an individual power converter of DGs can be computed
wherein controlling multiple DGs for a voltage control, it is
important that the operating limits of each power converter are
not exceeded, defined in Step 2, Step 4 and Step 5.
In Fig. 11, Q max
j , DG is the maximum available reactive
power (i.e., limit) that the power converter can provide
according to the instantaneous measured active power Pjmeas
, DG ,
and ∆Qcont is the total reactive power required for the voltage
regulation at the PCC. It is assumed that the nominal apparent
power of the converter is S max
j , DG , defined here as the converter
rating where it also follows that − S max
j , DG ≤ Pj , DG ≤ S j , DG .
meas max
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy

In Fig. 12, the △Pcont in Step 1 is the required the active

power from the frequency controller to regulate the frequency
at the PCC. Step 2 is the maximum available active power,
which can be generated from the DGs. Assuming a
proportional distribution in Step 3, the portion of active power
to the DGs can be computed wherein controlling multiple DGs
for a frequency control, it is important that the operating limits
of each DG are not exceeded, which is defined in Step 2, Step
4 and Step 5.
In Fig. 12, ∆Pjmax, DG is the maximum available active power
(i.e., limit) that the power can provide, and ∆Pcont is the total
active power required for the frequency regulation at the PCC.
Here, Pjmax meas
, DG is the power rating of the converter and Pj , DG is
the measured value of active power generation on jth converter.
The block diagram of the proposed supervisory power
quality control scheme is depicted in Fig. 13.
In this section, the supervisory power quality scheme is
presented. As developed, the voltage regulation is achieved by
the power conversion system of BSS and PVS. However, the
frequency regulation can be limited to a certain DG, which can
be constrained by its energy source. Thus, the BSS is the only
DG to contribute the frequency regulation on the microgrid.
Fig. 12. Frequency control methodology. Since the overall control objective is to regulate the
voltage/frequency at a single location PCC, this supervisory
control scheme appears to be reasonable as well as justifiable.

IV. CASE STUDIES

This section shows the simulation studies conducted in
Matlab/Simulink environment [24]. The case studies are
simulated about the voltage and frequency regulation based
on the load variation and a sudden increase of solar
irradiation as follows:
1) BSS runs with 60kW of consumer load (voltage and
frequency regulation)
2) PVS is connected to the PCC at 1 sec.
3) Consumer load is increased by 50% (90.0kW) at 2sec.,
and decreased by the 30% (63kW) at 3sec., continued
for 4sec.
4) Consumer load is increaeed by 50% (94.5kW) at 4sec.
5) The PVS ramps up of its generation from 7.5kW at
5sec., and reaches 38kW at 5.25sec.

The corresponding transient responses of the system with

different control modes are depicted in Fig.14-16. As shown in
Fig. 14, since the frequency regulation because of the absence
of other rotating machines, the frequency responses are similar
because the BSS is the only DG to contribute. However, since
the power converter is applied to voltage regulation using both
BSS and PVS, the voltage response is significantly improved
without distorting active/reactive power generation and/or
consumption.

Fig. 13. Proposed supervisory power quality control scheme.

1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
Fig. 14. Voltage and frequency response at the PCC
Fig. 15. Active power response at the BSS, PVS and load
branch.
In Fig. 15, the BSS is dominantly takes care of active
power charging and discharging according to the load
variation and the sudden increase of solar irradiation while
PVS does not have the charging operation mode. When it
comes to the reactive power response shown in Fig. 16, both
of BSS and PVS are well performed in the proposed
supervisory scheme. In Fig. 16, the individual control scheme
shows a small discrepancy comparing with the supervisory
1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
power quality scheme. This is because the individual scheme
does not consider the line impedance such as RL at PCC. Thus,
the proposed supervisory control provides the most
active/reactive power support and better damping during a
load deviation and sudden increase of the solar irradiation.
Fig. 16. Reactive power response at the BSS, PVS and load
branch.
As shown in the simulation studies, the proposed control
scheme shows the overall power quality improvement in terms
of the voltage and frequency on the microgrid. Also the
control methodology takes into account of line impedances.
The individual voltage control scheme is briefly explained in
the Appendixes.
V. CONCLUSION
This paper demonstrated the power quality enhancement
methodology. This proposed supervisory power quality
control scheme considers the operating-point-dependent active
and reactive power limit of each DGs and DG’s power
converter was also taken into account. The overall
voltage/frequency control scheme and the control design
methodology developed in this paper can be applied to
different microgrid configurations. The case studies showed
the comparisons between the individual power quality control
and supervisory power quality control. The proposed scheme
shows the significant improvement in the voltage performance
and frequency that is achieved by the consideration of line
losses and decoupling of control actions from both DGs. This
paper also indicates the important of control methodology
development such that system operating control scheme of
grid-off microgrids have to be designed according to DG’s
dynamic characteristics.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy

APPENDIXES reactive power has to be utilized to regulate the voltage and

loss information of the line impedances. This means higher
A. BSS branches uncertainties and risk of the discrepancy at the rated voltage
Parameter and controller malfunctions due to the no communication.
Input
Vbatt The measured battery voltage through a sensor
Ibatt The measured battery current through a sensor
Vmg The measured microgrid voltage at the PCC through a sensor
Io The measured BSS output current through a sensor
Theta The phase angle input of the output voltage
Pcbss The active power set-point from the supervisory controller
Qcbss The reactive power set-point from the supervisory controller
Output
d_i The d-axis output control level to control the bi-directional inverter
q_i The q-axis output control level to control the bi-directional inverter
Values
Nominal power 80 kW
Battery float voltage 735 V
DC voltage input sensor gain 1/1000 at Vbatt input
DC current input sensor gain 1/200 at the Ibatt input
(Micro)grid voltage input sensor gain 1/1000 at the Vmg input
(Micro)grid current input sensor gain 1/1000 at the Io input
d-component PI regulator proportional gain 0.4 Fig. B2. Independent control
d-component PI regulator integral gain 200
d-component PI regulator limit ±1
q-component PI regulator proportional gain 0.8 C. PVS branches
q-component PI regulator integral gain 100
d-component PI regulator limit ±1
Parameter
Input
Vpv The measured array voltage through a sensor
B. Individual voltage control scheme of the BSS Vdc Measured DC-DC converter output voltage through a sensor
iL Measured DC-DC converter inductor current through a sensor
Io Measured PVS output current through a sensor
Theta The phase angle input of the output voltage
Qcpvs The reactive power set-point from the supervisory controller
Output
DC The duty cycle control output for the DC-DC converter
di The d-axis output control level to control the 3-phase inverter
qi The q-axis output control level to control the 3-phase inverter
CV The constant voltage level for the MPPT regulation
Values
Nominal DC-DC converter output voltage 730 V
DC-DC converter output voltage sensor gain 1/1000
DC-DC converter PI voltage regulator proportional gain 5
DC-DC converter PI voltage regulator integral gain 500
DC-DC converter PI voltage regulator limit ±1
DC-DC converter PI current regulator proportional gain 1
DC-DC converter PI current regulator integral gain 1000
DC-DC converter PI current regulator low limit -0.5
DC-DC converter PI current regulator high limit +0.35
MPPT constant voltage level (CV) 360V
Initial value of CV level 470V
Slope of ramp to the set value -400V/sec
PV array output voltage, input sensor gain 1/1000 at the Vpv input
MPPT d-component PI regulator proportional gain 1
MPPT d-component PI regulator integral gain 2
MPPT d-component PI regulator limit ±1
(Micro)grid voltage input sensor gain 1/1000 at the Vmg input
Fig. B1. Individual power quality control scheme (Micro)grid current input sensor gain 1/1000 at the Io input
(Micro)grid q-component PI regulator proportional gain 0.1
Fig. B1 and Fig. B2 shows the individual power quality (Micro)grid q-component PI regulator integral gain 5
control scheme for the voltage regulation in the BSS. The (Micro)grid q-component PI regulator limit ±1
main characteristic of this individual control scheme is to
utilize q-component switching signal in order to regulate the D. Controller parameters of supervisory power quality control
voltage at the PCC by the independent voltage controller. The Voltage controller
independent controller directly utilizes the voltage at PCC. Proportional gain 0.07
However, this methodology does not have a link how much Integral gain 120

1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSTE.2017.2747591, IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy
PI regulator limits ±1
Frequency controller
Proportional gain 0.05
Integral gain 150
PI regulator limits ±1
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was conducted under framework of the research
and development program of the Korea Institute of Energy
Research (B7-2442)
REFERENCES
[1] J. M. Guerrero, J. C. Vasquez, J. Matas, D. Vicuna, L. Garc´ıa, and M.
Castilla, “Hierarchical control of droop-controlled ac and dc
microgridsła general approach toward standardization,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 158–172, 2011.
[2] 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, 2013.
[3] H. Mahmood, D. Michaelson, and J. Jiang, “Accurate reactive power
sharing in an islanded microgrid using adaptive virtual impedances,”
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 1605–1617,
2015.
[4] A. Bidram, A. Davoudi, and F. L. Lewis, “A multiobjective distributed
control framework for islanded ac microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Informatics, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1785–1798, 2014.
[5] V. Nasirian, Q. Shafiee, J. Guerrero, F. Lewis, and A. Davoudi,
“Droopfree distributed control for ac microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 1600–1617, 2016.
[6] F. Guo, C. Wen, J. Mao, and Y.-D. Song, “Distributed secondary voltage
and frequency restoration control of droop-controlled inverterbased
microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 62, no. 7,
pp. 4355–4364, 2015.
[7] `A. Bidram, A. Davoudi, F. L. Lewis, and J. M. Guerrero, “Distributed
cooperative secondary control of microgrids using feedback
linearization,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 28, no. 3, pp.
3462–3470, 2013.
[8] Q. Sun, R. Han, H. Zhang, J. Zhou, and J. Guerrero, “A multiagent-
based consensus algorithm for distributed coordinated control of
distributed generators in the energy internet,” IEEE Transactions on
Smart Grid, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 3006–3019, 2015.
[9] J. Schiffer, T. Seel, J. Raisch, and T. Sezi, “Voltage stability and reactive
power sharing in inverter-based microgrids with consensusbased
distributed voltage control,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems
Technology, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 96–109, 2016.
[10] Q. Shafiee, J. M. Guerrero, and J. C. Vasquez, “Distributed secondary
control for islanded microgridsła novel approach,” IEEE Transactions on
Power Electronics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 1018–1031, 2014.
[11] L.-Y. Lu and C.-C. Chu, “Consensus-based droop control synthesis for
multiple dics in isolated micro-grids,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 2243–2256, 2015.
[12] J. W. Simpson-Porco, F. D¨orfler, and F. Bullo, “Synchronization and
power sharing for droop-controlled inverters in islanded microgrids,”
Automatica, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 2603–2611, 2013.
[13] X. Wu, C. Shen, and R. Iravani, “Feasible range and optimal value of the
virtual impedance for droop-based control of microgrids,” IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, 2016, early access article.
[14] Y. W. Li and C.-N. Kao, “An accurate power control strategy for
powerelectronics-interfaced distributed generation units operating in a
lowvoltage multibus microgrid,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 2977–2988, 2009.
[15] Maniktala, Sanjaya: Switching Power Suppliers A-Z, 2nd Ed., Newnes
Press, 2012
[16] R. W. Erikson, D. Maksimovic: Fundermentals of Power Electronics, 2nd
Ed., Kluwer Academic, 2001.
1949-3029 (c) 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
[17] H. S. Ko, T. Niimura, J. Jatskevich, H. C. Kim, and K. Y. Lee, “Power
quality control of hybrid wind power generation with battery storage
using fuzzy-LQR controller,” in IEEE Power Engineering Society
Meeting, Denver, Colorado, pp. 1722–1728, Jun. 2004.
[18] G. Perez, I. Gandiaga, M. Garmendia, J. F. Reynaud and U. Viscarret,
“Modelling of Li-ion batteries dynamics using impedance spectroscopy
and oluse fitting: EVs application,” International Battery, Hybrid and
Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium, pp. 1–9, 2013.
[19] N. Femia, G. Petrone, G. Spagnuolo, M. Vitelli: Power Electronics and
Control Techniques for Maximum Energy Harvesting in Photovoltaic
Systems, CRC Press, 2013
[20] R. Teodorescu, M. Liserre, P. Rodriguez: Grid Converters for
Photovoltaic and Wind Power Systems, Wiley-IEEE Press, 2011.
[21] T. Suntio, et al: Issues on Solar-Generator Interfacing with Current-Fed
MPP-Tracking Converters, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics,
Vol. 25 No. 9, Sept 2010.
[22] S. Golestan, M. Monfared, F. D. Freijedo and M. Guerrero, “Dynamics
assessment of advanced single-phase PLL structure,” IEEE Transactions
on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 2167-2177, 2013.
[23] P. Kunder, Power System Stability and Control. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1994.
[24] Matlab/Simulink Toolbox, 2016, The Math-Works Inc., Natick, MA.
BIOGRAPHIES
Hee-Sang Ko received his B.S. degree in Electrical
Engineering from Jeju National University, Jeju,
Korea, in 1996, his M.Sc. degree in Electrical
Engineering from Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, USA, in 2000, and his Ph.D. in
Electrical and Computer Engineering from the
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, in
2006. He worked for Samsung Heavy Industries in
wind power division from 2008 to 2013. He is
currently a researcher in KIER since 2013. His research interests include
microgrids, distribution network, power systems stability, neural network,
fuzzy logic, control design, and system identification.
Moon-Seok Jang received the Ph.D. from the
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hanyang
University, Seoul, Korea, in 1994. In 1994, he joined
Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER) and since
2002, he has been a Principal researcher. He is former
Director of Jeju Global Research Center, Korea
Institute of Energy Research and the Vice president of
Korea Wind Energy Association.He works at system
convergence laboratory.
Kyung-Sang Ryu received the B.S. degree and M.S.
in KOREATECH, Cheon-An, South Korea, in 2008,
2013. He joined Korea Institute of Energy Research
(KIER) and since 2013. He is currently working as
researcher at Jeju Global Research Center, Korea
Institute and Energy Research. His research interests
include operation of power distribution systems,
energy storage system and power quality.
Dae-Jin Kim received his B.S. degree in Mechatronics
Engineering from Seoul National University of
Technology, Korea, in 2007, and his M.S. degree in
Mechatronics Engineering from Seoul National
University of Technology, Korea, in 2009. He worked
in Wind Energy Division at the Daewoo Shipbuilding
Marine Engineering from 2009 to 2014. In 2014, he
joined in Korea Institute of Energy Research. His
research interests include control system design and
Power-Hardware-In-Loop Simulator.
Byung-Ki Kim received the B.S. degree, M.S. degree
and Ph.D degree in KOREATECH, Cheon-An, South
Korea, in 2008, 2012 and 2015. He is currently
working as senior researcher at Jeju Global Research
Center Korea Institute and Energy Research. His
research interests include operation of power
distribution systems, dispersed storage, generation
systems and power quality.