International Journal of Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 36, No.
1, 2016
AN ADAPTIVE REACTIVE POWER
PERTURBATION BASED HYBRID
ISLANDING DETECTION METHOD FOR
DISTRIBUTED GENERATION SYSTEMS
Geethi Krishnan∗ and Dattatraya N. Gaonkar∗
Abstract
The intentional islanding operation of distributed generation (DG)
systems can bring many benefits to the DG owner, distribution
network operators and customers. One of the requirements for
intentional islanding operation is the successful detection of the grid
events which can lead to islanding of the DG system. This paper
presents the hybrid islanding detection method based on adaptive
reactive power variation with a passive algorithm that relies on the
transient response characteristics for facilitating islanding detection.
The proposed method presented in this paper can overcome the
problems in the reactive power variation based methods. Extensive
studies are conducted for differentiating the transient characteristic
features for islanded and non-islanded systems. In this study
the adaptive reactive power sequence is modified to enhance the
performance under sudden load changes. The proposed method
proved to detect all probable islanding situations with minimum
run-on time. The performance of the method is evaluated using
simulation results obtained from MATLAB/SIMPOWERSYSTEMS
software considering wind power based DG system.
Key Words
Distributed generation, islanding, point of common coupling, non-
detection zone
1. Introduction
The grid integration of distributed generation (DG) is ex-
pected to play an important role in the future electricity
market due to increasing demand of power. DG including
photovoltaic, wind farms, fuel cell and micro turbines can
resolve the rising concerns for environmental safety while
supplying a reliable, cost-effective power [1]. Despite all
these advantages, so many critical issues need to be consid-
ered for effective grid integration. Islanding is one of the
∗
Department of Electrical Engineering, National Institute of
Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Karnataka, India; e-mail:
{kgeethi9; dngaonkar}@gmail.com
1
prominent issues which can seriously impair the safety of
the DG and loads [2]. Hence according to current protec-
tion practices, the DG system should disconnect the DG
from the utility grid within 2 s [3], [4]. But tripping the
DG during a mains failure has limited the benefits offered
by it, particularly when it is capable of supplying the local
load within the statutory voltage, frequency and power
quality limits. As a result, the IEEE Std. 1547-2003 states
the implementation of intentional islanding of DGs as one
of its tasks for future consideration [5], [6]. For intention-
ally sustaining an island, a secure, reliable islanding detec-
tion algorithm which takes minimum time for detection is
required.
Islanding detection methods discussed in the literature
can be broadly classified as active, passive and communi-
cation based methods [7], [8]. Passive methods directly
monitor local parameters like voltage (over voltage protec-
tion (OVP)/under voltage protection (UVP)), frequency
(over frequency protection (OFP)/under frequency protec-
tion (UFP)), and rate of change of frequency and detect
islanding when any of these parameters exceed the speci-
fied limits. The deviations in above specified parameters
during an islanding occurrence are subjected to the varia-
tions in network topology difference, inverter and the local
load and lead to non-detection zones (NDZ). On the other
hand, active methods inject disturbances, and the result-
ing parameter variation is used to detect islanding. These
methods have small NDZ comparing with passive methods,
but can degrade the power quality of the system. Fre-
quency drift methods like active frequency drift, slip mode
frequency shift, Sandia frequency shift and reactive power
variation methods are the prominent active methods dis-
cussed in the literature [9], [10]. Communication methods
like power line carrier and transfer trip being costly are
rarely used for small systems [11]. In hybrid methods,
active and passive methods are combined and disturbance
is injected only when islanding is suspected by the passive
algorithm.
In [12], a low-frequency disturbance signal of 1 Hz
is injected with the reactive current through the q axis
Figure 1. Single line diagram of system under study.
controller. A frequency deviation detector is used to
detect the deviations from rated frequency and to provide
a reliable detection that is not sensitive to grid impedance
variation. Reference [13] proposed injection of a harmonic
current reference of 0.5 Hz and detects islanding using
phase jump detection method. In [14], frequency is used
as feedback to shift Q-f curve to an unstable operating
point during islanding. But the proper choice of gain
value is necessary to avoid false misinterpretations due to
other dynamics in grid connected mode. In [15] frequency
is monitored following the injection of a periodic reactive
power reference is less than 2.5% of the rated kVA (kilo
volt ampere).
Choe et al. [16] deduce the detailed design for ob-
taining the reactive power value based on the character-
istic analysis of system frequency variation caused by is-
landing. In [17], it has been given that intermittent bi-
lateral reactive power variation (IBRPV) injection with
magnitude 5% of rated power intermittently can elimi-
nate the NDZ. In [18] load resonant frequency is used
as an improvement over the IBRPV method. Compar-
ing with the former method, this method produces uni-
lateral variation by injecting minimum reactive power to
drift the frequency out of threshold value .Conventional
hybrid methods monitor different parameters like voltage
unbalance, total harmonic distortion (THD), average rate
of change of voltage or intelligent based techniques for
generating the initial suspicion signal [19]–[22]. Notwith-
standing its merits, the need for tedious calculation and
the dependency of the threshold setting on the geograph-
ical and topological variation can act as a hindrance in
these methods. A new hybrid islanding detection method
employing active and passive methods for synchronously
rotating DGs is proposed in [23]. In [24] a simulation
and experimental validation of hybrid islanding detection
scheme using pulse current injection based active method
and power line communication remote technique have been
presented.
In this paper hybrid technique is proposed combin-
ing the features of adaptive reactive power based active
method with a passive algorithm. The proposed method
does not require continuous injection of the disturbance,
2
hence negative impact of the conventional method has
been eliminated. Active method comes into actin only
when passive method suspects the islanding. The devel-
oped method is capable of detecting all probable islanding
situations with minimum run-on time compared with con-
ventional method and its performance is evaluated using
wind based DG system.
2. Study System
Figure 1 shows the single line diagram of the system.
The system consists of a DG represented by a DC source,
interfaced to the grid through a voltage source inverter,
LC filter and a breaker. The interface control is designed
with proportional integral (PI) controllers, with the control
variables defined in the synchronous reference frame [25]. A
phase locked loop (PLL) is used to determine the frequency
and angular reference at the point of common coupling
(PCC). The grid is assumed to be relatively stiff and hence
maintains the PCC voltage and frequency at constant
values. Hence, in grid connected mode, the voltage source
inverter is controlled to deliver constant active and reactive
power. As the voltages are synchronized to the grid through
three-phase PLL, Vq equals zero. Hence the inverter active
power and reactive power can be controlled separately by
varying the d axis and q axis currents separately, as shown
in (1).
3 3
P = Vd Id , Q = − Vd Iq (1)
2 2
is the maximum value of the voltage at the PCC and Id
and Iq are the components of the current in the dq axis.
In grid connected system, the total load demand is
shared between the DG and the grid. But when grid gets
disconnected, the DG system should have to meet this
whole load demand alone. As the interface controller is
designed to provide some preset constant power, the gener-
ation couldn’t always match the load demand [26]. Hence
depending on the load generation mismatch, the magni-
tude and frequency of the PCC voltage vary to meet the
demand. If these parameters exceed the threshold spec-
ified by the standards, islanding will be detected by the
OVP/UVP and OFP/UFP methods. But if the load gen- 3.1 Adaptive Reactive Power Calculation
eration mismatch is quite small, there will be insufficient
change in the magnitude and frequency of the PCC volt- The resonant frequency, fres and quality factor, Qf of an
age to activate any standard protection devices. This will RLC load can be expressed as:
result in NDZ [27]–[31]. For a current controlled interface, 
the NDZ can be analytically derived as: 1 C
fres = √ Qf = R (4)
2π LC L
ΔP
[ V /Vmax ] − 1 ≤ ≤ [ V /Vmin ] − 1 (2) From (4) RLC parameters can be expressed as follows:
P
R Qf P
    L= C= (5)
2 ΔQ 2 2 π fres Qf R fres 2 π
Qf 1 − [f /fmax ] ≤ ≤ Qf 1 − [f /fmin ] (3)
P
The active and reactive power consumed by a three-phase
To avoid this NDZ, an external disturbance can be in- RLC load can be expressed as follows. VP CC represents
jected such that the frequency and voltage deviate beyond the rms value of the PCC voltage:
 
the threshold value when islanded. With the constant VP2CC 2 1
power controlled interface, voltage variation is dominated Pload = 3 Qload = 3VP CC − 2πf C (6)
R 2πf L
by active power mismatch and frequency variation by reac-
tive power mismatch. As a result if active power is varied, Combining (4) and (5) with (6), an expression for Qload
the PCC voltage magnitude varies considerably comparing can be derived as:
with the frequency. Whereas for reactive power variation,    
1 fres f
the frequency drift will dominate the voltage variation. Qload = Pload R − 2πf C = Pload Qf −
Reactive power variations are more sensitive and produce 2πf L f fres
notable deviations in frequency to trigger islanding detec- (7)
tion. Moreover they are easy to implement comparing with
the former one. After islanding, the whole load demand is supplied by
the inverter. P and Q represent the output active and
3. Analysis of Adaptive Reactive Power Injection reactive power from the inverter, respectively, so
Method
Pload = P Qload = Q (8)
 
After islanding, with reactive power reference as zero, the fres f
Q = P Qf − (9)
frequency of PCC voltage will deviate to the resonance f fres
frequency of the RLC loads. If this resonance frequency is
beyond the threshold limits, the conventional OFP/UFP where f represents the steady-state frequency after island-
protection can detect islanding successfully without any ing and it varies depending on the inverter output reactive
disturbance injection. But if the resonance frequency is power, Q. Hence we have to inject Q depending upon fres
within the limit [fmin , fmax ], then a reactive power pertur- such that f will just go beyond the threshold value. The
bation is needed to drift the frequency outside the thresh- frequency value which could perturb the f to the frequency
old values [31]. The minimum reactive power perturbation lower bound fmin and upper bound fmax can be expressed
required for different RLC loads vary, depending on their respectively by equations:
resonant frequency characteristics. The adaptive reac-  
fres fmin
tive power perturbation calculates this minimum reactive Q1 = P × Qf − (10)
fmin fres
power reference based on the PCC frequency and injects
 
them as a perturbation sequence in intermittent intervals fres fmax
as shown in Fig. 2. Q2 = P × Qf − (11)
fmax fres
The relationship of Q1 and Q2 with fres is illustrated
in Fig. 3. Quality factor is taken as 2.5. From Fig. 3,
the minimum reactive power variation can be expressed as
follows:
⎧ ⎧
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎨ Qref = Q1 : fmin < fres < 60 Hz
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ 0 ≤ t ≤ T1 :
⎪
⎩Q
⎪ ref = Q2 : 60 Hz ≤ fres < fmax (12)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ T1 ≤ t ≤ T 1 : Q = 0

Analysing the transient characteristics of the PLL and

Figure 2. Perturbation sequence under different grid fre- considering the time requirements for islanding detection,
quencies. the reactive power variation parameters are given in [18].
3
 Figure 4. PCC frequency variation for different Qf for a
load with resonant frequency 60.2 Hz.
Figure 3. Minimum reactive power perturbation based on
resonance frequency.

3.2 Shortcoming of the Above Method

Although the merits of the above suggested method is

incredible, it does suffer certain drawbacks.
1. The specific detection timing of the islanding depends
on the time at which islanding takes place.
The above specified method injects the reactive power
disturbance intermittently in an interval of 1.8 s. If
islanding happens, just after the injection of one pulse
of reactive power reference, detection is not possible for
Figure 5. PCC frequency variation for different Qf for a
another 1.8 s. Hence, there is a direct dependency of
load with resonant frequency 59.7 Hz.
the islanding detection timing on the time of islanding.
Table 1 provides the study results to validate the
same. The parameters used for the study is included
in the Appendix A (Tables A.1 and A.2). It can be true and the hence the method will fail for loads having
observed that except for Case 1, the time taken for Qf > 2.5. Also, for loads with Qf < 2.5, the reactive
islanding detection is different for islanding occurrence power injection will not be at the required minimum.
at t = 3.5 s, t = 4 s and t = 5.5 s. The variation of PCC frequency of the island with
2. The method fails for loads with quality factor loads having different Qf following same disturbance
(Qf ) > 2.5. injection can be observed in Figs. 4 and 5.
From (10) and (11), it can be seen that the minimum 3. The method can be subjected to mal operation when
reactive power to be injected depends on the quality a simultaneous switching of load happens with the
factor (Qf ). As the RLC load parameters of the reactive power injection.
islanded region are not known, adaptive calculation of As already explained, this method injects disturbance
Qf based on system parameters is not a feasible option. intermittently in an interval of 1.8 s. The magnitude
Hence we took Qf as 2.5 as specified by the IEEE Std. of the injected reactive power is related to the fre-
929-2000 for anti-islanding test systems. This value of quency of PCC voltage of the previous sampling in-
quality factor is assigned, assuming that most of the stant. Consider that system gets islanded at t = 0.5 s.
loads will have Qf < 2.5. But this might not always be The active and reactive power demand from the load

Table 1
Effect of Time of Islanding Occurrence on Specific Detection Time

Time Taken for Islanding Detection (s)

Time of islanding occurrence Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5
Islanding takes place (at t = 3.5 s) 0.08 1.9 0.2 0.2 1.9
Islanding takes place (at t = 4 s) 0.08 1.45 1.45 1.45 1.45
Islanding takes place (at t = 5.5 s) 0.08 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8

4
Figure 6. Response of an islanded system for reactive power injection without load switching: (a) frequency variation of PCC
voltage; (b) output of islanding detection algorithm; and (c) reactive power disturbance.

Figure 7. Response of an islanded system for reactive power injection with simultaneous load switching: (a) frequency
variation of PCC voltage; (b) output of islanding detection algorithm; and (c) reactive power disturbance.

was 100% matching with the generation. So, a reac-
tive power reference, Qref of 450 Var (corresponding
to fres = 59.95 Hz) is injected at t = 1.8 s. But at the
same time a reactive load with a resonant frequency of
60.2 Hz is switched on. As a result, the frequency drift
introduced by the disturbance injection becomes insuf-
ficient to detect islanding. As the reactive power refer-
ence will be zero for another 1.8 s, islanding detection
time will go beyond 2 s.
The PCC frequency variation without and with load
switching is shown in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively. It
can be observed that, if there is no load switching,
the islanding is detected within 1.4 s, whereas when
load is switched simultaneous to the reactive power
injection, the detection time is 3.15 s, which exceeds
the maximum time limit specified by the standards.
5
4. Even if the possibility of islanding is very less, the
reactive power variation is to be injected continuously
in an interval of 1.8 s. Continuous injection impairs
the power quality of the system.
4. Proposed Hybrid Detection Method
To overcome all the above-mentioned problems, some im-
provements can be incorporated with the existing tech-
nique. Hence considering all of the above inferences, a
new monitoring method is devised. The following section
explains the proposed algorithm. The developed method
classifies all the islands under four categories.
Case 1 : The variation between load and generation
is considerably high such that the frequency and voltage
go outside the set limits. As a result, islanding can be
Figure 8. Response of system parameters to islanding: (a) frequency; (b) active power output; (c) d axis component of the
voltage; and (d) reactive power.

Table 2
Performance of the Proposed Algorithm with Simulated Disturbances

Event Description Expected Result Actual Result

P mismatches(±40%) with RLC load at PCC Islanding Detected
Q mismatches(±5%) with RLC load at PCC Islanding Detected
Load switching ON (50% of inverter output power) Non-islanding Not detected
Capacitor bank of 50 kVar is switched ON Non-islanding Not detected
Load switching OFF (50% of inverter output power) Non-islanding Not detected
Capacitor bank of 50 kVar is switched OFF Non-islanding Not detected
Non-linear load (a 2 kW diode rectifier) Non-islanding Not detected
Motor load switching Non-islanding Not detected
PQ mismatch Islanding Detected
Line to ground temporary fault (fault duration:0.2 s) Non-islanding Not detected

easily detected by directly monitoring these parameters.
However to avoid false detection, a time delay t1 = 60 ms is
considered.
Case 2 : Frequency deviation is well beyond the thresh-
old value because of the mismatch in reactive power. But
as the active power demand of load and generation match,
voltage variation is less than set limit. As per IEEE 1547,
following a variation in frequency, >60.5 Hz or <59.3 Hz,
<160 ms, DG should shut down. Adhering that rule, if such
a condition retain for 120 ms, detection of the islanding
takes place.
Case 3 : The active power mismatch between load and
generation pulls the voltage outside the limits, whereas
frequency is within the value. To cross-check the formation
of island, a small perturbation is given to the reactive
6
power reference. The magnitude of the perturbation is
calculated based on the resonant frequency, as indicated in
Fig. 3. In case of islanding, frequency deviates beyond the
limits islanding will be detected.
Case 4 : The most difficult case for detecting an is-
land is when both the voltage and frequency at PCC
stays within the threshold limits. However it had been
observed that the transients of the voltage, frequency, ac-
tive and reactive power of the inverter show some pat-
tern in an islanded system which differs from the re-
sponse due to other power system dynamics. If this
pattern is known, it can be used as a trigger for gen-
erating an islanding suspicion signal. Figure 8 shows
an example of the response of these parameters during
islanding.
Figure 9. Proposed detection algorithm.

For case 4, the proposed algorithm follows a procedure values need to be chosen such that no false operation
as detailed in the steps below (also shown in Fig. 9.) happens for dynamics of the power system.
Step 1. The monitoring unit keeps on monitoring Step 3. Check for any continuous deviation in the
whether any change is observable in active (P ) and active power and voltage.
reactive (Q) power, voltage (V ) and frequency (f ). Step 4. Generate an islanding suspicion signal, if any
Step 2. After a significant change in reactive power one of the above two statements are true. If not, start
whether frequency is deviating and settling at a new from step 1.
operating point. Step 5. As per (12) calculate the required reactive
power to be injected as disturbance corresponding to
⎧ ⎫ the resonant frequency for 100 ms.
⎪
⎪ Pold + ΔP < Pnew < Pold − ΔP ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ Step 6. If frequency is less than 59.5 Hz or greater
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ V + ΔV < V ⎬ than 60.5 Hz, then islanding condition is detected.
old new < Vold − ΔV
(13) The performance of the proposed algorithm is tested
⎪
⎪ fold + Δf < fnew < fold − Δf ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ for the system shown in Fig. 1 considering 10 kW inverter
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎩ Q=  0 ⎭ based DG system. The results of this study is reported in
Table 2.

Pold , Vold and fold represent the inverter active power,
PCC voltage and frequency of the last sampling in-
stant, respectively. Pnew , Vnew and fnew represent the
same parameter values for the new sampling instant,
respectively. ΔP, ΔV and Δf are the set deviations
limit of the inverter active power, PCC voltage and
frequency from the nominal values, respectively. These
7
5. Analysis of the Developed Method with Wind
Power System
This section discusses the performance of the algorithm
during islanding and non-islanding events for a wind power
system, with common power system events. Different
cases such as load variation, voltage sag, switching of the
Figure 10. Synchronous generator based wind DG system.
Figure 11. Response of the wind based system for load switching: (a) voltage in pu; (b) inverter active power output in MW;
(c) frequency in Hz; and (d) inverter reactive power output in Mvar.
non-linear load has been considered to prove the effec-
tiveness of the developed technique. A 10 MW wind sys-
tem with synchronous generator model from MATLAB/
SIMPOWERSYSTEM is used for the study. The simulated
system used in this study is shown in Fig. 10.
• Load switching
Initially the system was in grid integrated mode with
constant power control. The load of the inverter is
8
modelled using an RLC branch which is designed to
consume 10 MW at unity power factor (UPF). At time
t = 3 s, UPF load rated at 2 MW is switched in. As
shown in Fig. 11, during the switching instant, the
frequency of the voltage shows transients from the
nominal values. However within 100 ms, the transients
died down and the voltages settle down to the steady-
state value. Because of the 100 ms delay, programmed
Figure 12. Response of the wind based DG system for voltage sag: (a) voltage; (b) inverter active power output; (c) frequency;
and (d) inverter reactive power output.

Figure 13. Response for islanding: (a) voltage; (b) frequency; (c) inverter active power output; (d) inverter reactive power
output; (e) reactive power reference; and (f) output of islanding detection algorithm.

within the monitoring system, reactive power is not a reduction of 0.25 pu in the grid voltage, sustaining
injected. from 3 to 3.1 s can be observed in Fig. 12. This specific
• Voltage sag scenario is classified under Case 3 by the monitoring
This section explains the performance analysis of the algorithm. As indicated earlier, the delay time for
system during voltage sag. The system response for injecting perturbation is 100 ms. The variation in
9
 Table 3
Specific Detection Time for a Wind Power System

Cases Method Islanding detection time (s)

1 2 3 4 5
Islanding takes place (at t = 3.5 s) Conventional 0.08 1.9 0.2 0.2 1.9
Hybrid 0.19 0.65 0.47 0.4 0.7
Islanding takes place (at t = 4 s) Conventional 0.08 1.45 1.45 1.45 1.45
Hybrid 0.19 0.65 0.47 0.4 0.7
Islanding takes place (at t = 5.5 s) Conventional 0.08 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8
Hybrid 0.19 0.65 0.47 0.4 0.7

Figure 14. Response of the system for non-linear load switching: (a) magnitude of PCC voltage in pu; (b) inverter active
power output in MW; (c) frequency of PCC voltage in Hz; and (d) inverter reactive power output in Mvar.

the grid voltage settles before 100 ms, and no reactive
power injection takes place.
• Islanding
The system is islanded at t = 3 s as shown in Fig. 13.
The local RLC load resonates at 60.2 Hz. There is no
mismatch in the active power between the load and
the generation. This situation is sorted under Case
4 by the monitoring algorithm. Immediately after
the disconnection of the grid, reactive power output
of the inverter deviates from zero and slowly returns
back. Frequency varies slowly and settles at a new
value depending on the resonating condition. This
initiates the timing counter of the algorithm. When
the count reaches 100 ms, a reactive power of −0.026 pu
is injected in to the grid. As a result, frequency value
exceeds the set value of 60.5 Hz and islanding happens
(Fig. 13).
10
• Islanding occurrence on effect on detection time
A comparative study regarding the dependency of
the time of islanding and the detection time required
for conventional and proposed algorithm had been
conducted. For the conventional method, detection
time clearly dependent on the time of occurrence of
island. Whereas for the proposed algorithm; the time
of detection shows consistency and not depends on the
time of occurrence of the islanding event. The results
are given in Table 3.
• Switching of a non-linear load
A non-linear load rated at 2 MW is switched in at
t = 3 s. There is an initial shift in the magnitude of
PCC voltage, which deviates beyond the lower thresh-
old value of 0.88 pu. However the system returned
back and settled at the nominal value before 50 ms as
shown in Fig. 14.
6. Conclusion References
This paper presented a hybrid technique for detecting [1] T. Ackermann, G. Andersson, and L. Soder, Distributed
islanding condition effectively. The method uses an generation: A definition, Electric Power Systems Research,
existing reactive power injection technique with a novel 57(3), 2001, 195–204.
[2] N.D. Hatziargyriou and A.P.S. Meliopoulos, Distributed energy
transient characteristics based monitoring algorithm. sources: Technical challenges, IEEE Power Engineering Society
Extensive studies are conducted for identifying the differ- Winter Meeting, New York, USA, 2002, 1017–1022.
entiating transient characteristic features during islanding. [3] IEEE Std. 1547, Standard for interconnecting distributed re-
The performance of the proposed method has been evalu- sources with electric power systems, 2003.
ated using wind based DG system using simulation results. [4] IEEE Std. 929, IEEE recommended practice for utility interface
of photovoltaic (PV) systems, 2000.
The study presented indicates relatively accurate detection [5] I.J. Balaguer, Q. Lei, S. Yang, U. Supatti, and F.Z. Peng,
for most of the practical cases. This technique can be Control for grid-connected and intentional islanding opera-
implemented without much change in the control strategy tions of distributed power generation, IEEE Transactions on
and is well suited for intentional islanding operations. The Industrial Electronics, 58(1), 2011, 147–157.
[6] H. Zeineldin, E.F. El-Saadany, and M.M.A. Salama, Intentional
NDZ of this method is dependent on the ΔP , ΔV and Δf islanding of distributed generation, IEEE Power Engineering
magnitudes in addition to the quality factor of the load. Society General Meeting, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2005,
Wise choice of these parameters can make the method 1496–1502.
a viable approach for detecting islanding with minimum [7] W. Bower and M. Ropp, Evaluation of islanding detection
methods for photovoltaic utility-interactive power systems,
power quality impacts. International Energy Agency, Technical Report. IEA PVPS
T5-09, 2002.
[8] Z. Ye, R. Walling, L. Garces, R. Zhou, L. Li, and T. Wang,
Study and development of anti-islanding control for grid-
Appendix A connected inverters, General Electric Global Research Centre,
NREL/SR-560-36 243, 2004.
The system, DG interface, and load parameters and perfor- [9] P. Mahat, Z. Chen, and B. Bak-Jensen, Review of islanding de-
mance analysis for the different islanding studies performed tection methods for distributed generation, Proc. 3rd Interna-
tional Conf. on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring
are given in Tables A.1 and A.2. and Power Technologies, Nanjing, China, 2008, 2743–2748.
[10] W. Xu, K. Mauch, and S. Martel, An Assessment of DG
Islanding Detection Methods and Issues for Canada, CETC-
Varennes 2004-074 (TR), CANMET Energy Technology Centre
– Varennes, Natural Resources, Canada, July 2004, 53.
Table A.1 [11] W. Xu, G. Zhang, C. Li, W. Wang, G. Wang, and J. Kliber, A
Parameters Used for Case Studies power line signaling based technique for anti-islanding protec-
tion of distributed generators – Part i: Scheme and analysis,
Cases R (Ω) L (mH) C (mF) IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 22(3), 2007, 1758–1766.
[12] G.H. González and R. Iravani, Current injection for active
1 7.2 7.7166 0.93034 islanding detection of electronically interfaced distributed re-
sources, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 21(3), 2006,
2 4.33 4.6407 1.54694 1698–1705.
[13] J.B. Jeong, H.J. Kim, S.H. Back, and K.S. Ahn, An improved
3 7.2 7.639 0.921036 method for anti-islanding by reactive power control, Proceedings
of the 8th International Conference on Electronic Mechanical
4 4.33 4.6173 1.5392 Systems, 2, 2005, 965–970.
[14] H.H. Zeineldin, A Q-f droop curve for facilitating island-
ing detection of inverter-based distributed generation, IEEE
Transactions on Power Electronics, 24(3), 2009, 665–673.
[15] J.B. Jeong, H.J. Kim, K.S. Ahn, and C.H. Kang, A novel
Table A.2 method for anti-islanding using reactive power, Proc. 27th In-
System Parameters ternational Telecommunication Conf., Berlin, Germany, 2005,
101–106.
[16] G.-H. Choe, H.-S. Kim, H.-G. Kim, Y.-H. Choi, and J.-C.
Inverter Parameters Kim, The characteristic analysis of grid frequency variation
under islanding mode for utility interactive PV system with
Switching frequency 10 k Hz reactive power variation scheme for anti-islanding, Proc. 37th
IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conf., Oralando, Florida,
Input DC voltage 400 V
USA, 2006, 1–5.
Filter inductance 4.2 mH [17] J. Zhang, D. Xu, G. Shen, Y. Zhu, N. He, and J. Ma, An
improved islanding detection method for a grid-connected
Filter capacitance 31 μF inverter with intermittent bilateral reactive power varia-
tion, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 28(9), 2013,
Filter resistance 0.05 Ω 268–278.
[18] Y. Zhu, D. Xu, N. He, J. Ma, J. Zhang, Y. Zhang, G. Shen, and
Output voltage (phase to ground) 120 Vrms C.Hu, A novel RPV (reactive-power-variation) anti-islanding
method based on adapted reactive power perturbation, IEEE
Output power 20 kW Transactions on Power Electronics, 28(11), 2013, 4998–5012.
[19] P. Mahat, Z. Chen, and B.B. Jensen, A hybrid islanding
Grid parameters: Frequency 60 Hz, inductance 0.05 mH detection technique using average rate of voltage change and
Resistance: 0.02 Ω real power shift, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 24(2),
2009, 764–771.
11
[20] V. Menon and M.H. Nehrir, A hybrid islanding detection Dattatraya N. Gaonkar received
technique using voltage unbalance and frequency set point, his Ph.D. from the Indian In-
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 22(1), 2007, 442–448. stitute of Technology, Roorkee,
[21] K. El-Arroudi, G. Joos, I. Kamwa, and D.T. McGillis, Intelli-
gent based approach to islanding detection in distributed gen- India, in 2008. He was a visit-
eration, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 22(2), 2007, ing scholar at the University of
828–835. Saskatchewan, Canada. He also
[22] S.-I. Jang and K.-H. Kim, An islanding detection method
visited Center for Future Energy
for distributed generations using voltage unbalance and total
harmonic distortion of current, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems (CFES) at Rensselaer
Delivery, 19(2), 2004, 745–752. Polytechnic Institute (RPI), Troy,
[23] M. Moradzadeh, M. Rajabzadeh, and S.M.T. Bathaee, A novel New York, and Energy Reliability
hybrid islanding detection method for distributed generations,
Proc. 3rd International Conf. on Electric Utility Deregulation
& Security Laboratory at Michi-
and Restructuring and Power Technologies, Nanjing, China, gan State University (MSU) at
2008, 2290–2295. East Lansing, USA, and Energy Management and Micro-
[24] C.-C. Hou and Y.-C. Chen, A hybrid islanding detection grid Laboratory at NUS, Singapore, for research interac-
for distributed generation systems using pulse current injec-
tion, IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Electronics tion. He has edited and written a chapter in the book
(ISIE), Hangzhou, China, 2012, 1554–1559. titled “Distributed Generation”, which is published by
[25] T.N. Thacker, Control of power conversion systems for in- INTECH publication, Austria. He has published many
tentional islanding of distributed generation systems, Virginia articles in international journals and conferences and is a
University Technical Report, 2005.
[26] H. Zeineldin, E.F. El-Saadany, and M.M.A. Salama, Impact of senior member of the IEEE. His main research interests
DG interface control on islanding detection and non-detection are in the areas of power system operation and control,
zones, IEEE Trans. Power Del., 21(3), 2006, 1515–1523. distributed generation and power electronics.
[27] Z. Ye, A. Kolwalkar, Y. Zhang, P. Du, and R. Walling,
Evaluation of anti-islanding schemes based on non detection
zone concept, IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, 19(5),
2004, 171–1176.
[28] W.K.A. Najy, H.H. Zeineldin, and A.H.K. Alaboudy, A
Bayesian passive islanding detection method for inverter based
distributed generation using ESPRIT, IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, 26(4), 2011, 2687–2696.
[29] K. Geethi and D.N. Gaonkar, Control of grid connected and
islanding operations of distributed generation systems with
seamless transfer between modes, Proc. IEEE Multi-Conf. on
Systems and Control(MSC), Hyderabad, India, 2013.
[30] K. Geethi and D.N. Gaonkar, Intentional islanding of dis-
tributed generation system with a load shedding algorithm,
Proc. IEEE International Conf. on Power Electronics, Drives
and Energy Systems (PEDES-2012), CPRI, Bangalore, India,
2012.
[31] K. Geethi and D.N. Gaonkar, Performance evaluation of a
new hybrid islanding detection method for a wind based DG,
Proc. IEEE Conf. on Clean Energy and Technology, Langkawi,
Malaysia, 2013.

Biographies

Geethi Krishnan received her

M.Tech. (by research) from the
National Institute of Technology
Karnataka Surathkal, India, in
the year 2014. She worked as an
Assistant Professor in the Depart-
ment of Electrical and Electronics
Engineering, Manipal Institute
of Technology, Karnataka, India.
Presently working as a senior
research fellow at IIT Mumbai,
India. Her interests are in the
areas of distributed generation, power electronics and
control systems.

12