IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 9, NO.
2, MARCH 2018
Smart Deregulated Grid Frequency Control in
Presence of Renewable Energy Resources
by EVs Charging Control
Saber Falahati Aliabadi, Seyed Abbas Taher, Member, IEEE, and Mohammad Shahidehpour, Fellow, IEEE
Abstract—Nowadays, due to the increasing price of fossil fuels
and its decreasing resources on the one hand and environmen-
tal pollutions on the other hand, use of electric vehicles (EVs)
has been increased. Charging EVs has imposed new loads on
power systems. These new and major loads along with the dereg-
ulation of power systems, which introduces new uncertainties
to grid, have caused new challenges for the frequency control
and stability of power systems. Use of EVs as moving batter-
ies is one of the ways for dealing with this problem. In this
method, EV charging is controlled and, when necessary, EV bat-
tery is discharged in grid. This concept is so-called vehicle to
grid (V2G). V2G concept is employed in this paper for the con-
trol of a smart deregulated grid frequency. For this purpose, an
optimized fuzzy controller is used to control EVs. Using the pro-
posed method, charging or discharging batteries is carried out
with respect to grid frequency and battery state of charge. To
investigate the proposed approach, a modified IEEE 39-bus sys-
tem in the presence of renewable energy resources is assumed.
Then, this system is converted into a three area system in order
for the frequency analysis. Investigating the performance of the
proposed method for the charging of EVs is done in another part
of paper. Simulations are carried out in MATLAB/SIMULINK
environment and their results illustrate good performance of the
proposed method in the frequency control of deregulated system
and EV charging.
Index Terms—Smart grid, deregulated grid, vehicle to grid,
fuzzy control, renewable energy.
I. INTRODUCTION
LOBAL challenges of climate change, energy secu-
G rity, and environmental pollution have made renewable
energy increasingly significant in the energy system. National
policies in many countries have set ambitious targets for the
promotion of renewable energy. In the European Union (EU),
goals are set for 35% of electricity generation from renew-
able sources in 2020 [1]. Renewable energy currently provides
14% of the world’s energy supply [2], [3]. Output powers of
Manuscript received September 10, 2015; revised January 3, 2016 and
April 12, 2016; accepted May 26, 2016. Date of publication June 7, 2016;
date of current version February 16, 2018. Paper no. TSG-01110-2015.
(Corresponding author: Seyed Abbas Taher.)
S. F. Aliabadi and S. A. Taher are with the Department of Electrical
Engineering, University of Kashan, Kashan 87317-51167, Iran (e-mail:
sataher@kashanu.ac.ir).
M. Shahidehpour is with the Electrical and Computer Engineering
Department, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616 USA.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSG.2016.2575061
1949-3053 c 2016 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.
1073
some these resources depend on environmental conditions and
change during daytime. A major impact of large penetration
of variable generation into the power system’s operation and
control is on frequency control. Due to the uncertainties that
are introduced in power system by renewable energy sources,
more spinning reserve is needed to compensate for the gener-
ation and demand unbalance. Batteries can be used as storage
systems to compensate for such an unbalance. But, high price
of batteries is one the obstacles of this solution.
In addition to the above uncertainties, by converting con-
ventional power systems into deregulated power systems in
early decades, new uncertainties have been introduced to
power systems. In a traditional power system, generation,
transmission, and distribution are owned by a single entity
called a vertically integrated utility (VIU), which supplies
power to customers at regulated rates. In an open energy
market, generation companies (Gencos) may or may not par-
ticipate in the LFC task. On the other hand, a distribution
company (Disco) may contract individually with Gencos or
independent power producers (IPPs) for power in different
areas [4]. So, in deregulated power system, frequency control
is more complex.
In recent years, electric vehicles (EVs) have gained renewed
interest in the global research and industrial sectors. The
major factor attracting the promotion of EVs is the pollu-
tion and emission-free transportation it could offer, which is
a much needed global necessity for the sustainable future [1].
According to [2], the number of EVs in the United States
in the years 2020, 2030, and 2050 will reach 35%, 51%,
and 62%, respectively. International Energy Agency (IEA) has
predicted that the sales of passenger light-duty EV/plug-in
hybrid EV will boost from 2020 on and might reach more than
100 million of EV/plug-in hybrid EV sold per year worldwide
by 2050 [1]. Charging of such a large number of plug-in EVs
applies a major load to grid. This major load faces the power
system’s frequency control and stability with new challenges.
Control of EVs as controllable loads and use of their batter-
ies as power system spinning reserves are one of the solutions
for the frequency control of power systems. In this method,
EVs are connected to grid by bidirectional converters. Thus,
when load of grid is low, battery is charging; but, at high
loading of grid, it is discharging in grid. This concept is
known as vehicle to grid (V2G) and was used in [5] for the
first time. The idea behind V2G is that people usually do
not use their cars for long trips; so, batteries are not fully
1074
Fig. 1. EV availability [2].
discharged. Hence, when EVs are connected to the grid, the
remaining charge in their batteries can be used for regula-
tion purposes. In Fig. 1, EV availability in hours of day is
shown [2]. It can be seen in this figure that a proper num-
ber of EVs are reachable during a day. Hence, V2G concept
can be used in ancillary services. Since battery change rate is
very fast, V2G concept can be employed in frequency ancil-
lary services [6]. V2G concept has been employed in several
papers for frequency control of grid [7]–[12]. In [7], V2G con-
cept was used in order for grid’s frequency control along with
proposing a scheduled charging method. In this reference, the
controller was designed so that SOC (state of charge) of bat-
tery was balanced around 50%. However, if an EV owner
needs more SOC, this controller is unable to supply it. But,
in this paper, although 50% SOC was set for the controller,
if an EV owner needed more SOC, fuzzy rules could be
changed easily. In [8], although V2G was used for the robust
frequency control of system, it suffered from the same problem
as in [7]. In [9] and [10], V2G concept has been used for sec-
ondary frequency control. In [9], use of plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles (PHEVs) along with controllable loads for frequency
control was investigated and, in [10], a number of EVs and
heat pump water heaters were employed for load frequency
control. But, in this study, V2G concept was employed for pri-
mary frequency control. Fuzzy control of photovoltaic systems
along with using V2G for frequency control was proponed
in [11]. In this reference, EVs were used in secondary fre-
quency control and SOC of batteries was limited between 10%
and 90%. But, there was no control on the SOC of batteries.
In [12], decentralized V2G control was proposed for frequency
regulation.
Fuzzy controller is used in this paper for the control of EV
charging in order for the frequency control of a deregulated
grid. The general structure is represented in Fig. 2. In this
approach, each EV is connected to a charging station. Each
charging station communicates with grid with high speed links
so that, in this study, no delay time is supposed to exist in
data transfer. EV battery information such as SOC from EV
and grid information such as frequency from smart grid is
transferred to charging station. Fig. 3 represents the structure
of charging station. In charging station, processing based on
fuzzy control is carried out and the corresponding signals to
bidirectional converter are generated. Bidirectional converter
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 9, NO. 2, MARCH 2018
Fig. 2. Employed V2G structure.
Fig. 3. Structure of charging station.
with respect to coming signals makes the output power to grid
or EV battery. More details about the proposed fuzzy controller
are given in Section III.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section II,
the studied system and its modeling are presented. In this sec-
tion, modeling of EVs is briefly described. Modeling of arrival
and departure times of EVs along with modeling of daily travel
range of them are presented in this section. Moreover some
explanation on types of EVs and modeling of battery capacity
is given. In Section III, the proposed controller is explained.
Moreover, a summary description about fundamentals of fuzzy
controllers is given in this section. Simulations are carried
out and their results are analyzed in Section IV. Finally, in
Section V, the conclusion is expressed.
II. S YSTEM M ODELING
There are several frequency control loops in a power sys-
tem such as primary frequency control, secondary frequency
control, tertiary frequency control, and emergency frequency
control. Primary and secondary frequency control loops are
performed on the generation side only, while tertiary and
emergency frequency control loops can be used on both gen-
eration and demand sides. Primary control is the governor
control which is sufficient until frequency deviation is less
than a certain value. If the value of the frequency deviation
exceeds this certain limit, then primary control will not be
sufficient anymore and secondary frequency control or sup-
plementary control should be employed. Secondary control is
also called load frequency control. In this study, in order to fre-
quency control of grid, V2G concept based on fuzzy controller
along with primary and secondary frequency control loops
is used.
The studied IEEE 39-bus system is shown in Fig. 4. In this
power system, in addition to the conventional resources, solar
cells and EV charging stations are considered. In order for
the frequency analysis, this system is converted into a three
area deregulate system. Area i of the considered deregulated
system is depicted in Fig. 5. In this figure, Ki (s) is controller
of area i, and a PI controller is used for this purpose, similar to
most of the conventional power systems. The parameters of PI
are obtained by imperialist competitive algorithm (ICA) [13].
ICA has been used in various papers owing to its high speed
FALAHATI et al.: SMART DEREGULATED GRID FREQUENCY CONTROL 1075

Fig. 4. Modified IEEE 39 bus system in the presence of renewable energy resources and EVs.

Fig. 5. Area i of three area model.

1
and accuracy in finding the solutions of optimization prob- GTur (s) = (2)
lems; theory of this method has been described in detail 1 + sTt
in [14] and [15]. In order for simplicity, conventional genera-
tion resource is assumed as a non-reheat steam unit. Governor
and turbine units are modeled as follows: In the above equation, Tg and Tt are governor and turbine
time constants, respectively. In Fig. 5, PTie,i and Tij represent
1 tie line power deviation of area i and synchronous torque factor
GGov (s) = (1)
1 + sTg between areas i and j, respectively. It can be shown that PTie,i
1076 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 9, NO. 2, MARCH 2018

TABLE I
and Tij are obtained from the following equations [4]: N UMBER OF VARIOUS T YPES OF EV S IN THE U.K. IN 2020
⎡ ⎤

N
2π ⎢ 
N 
N
⎥
PTie,i = Ptie,ij = ⎢ T f − Tij fj ⎥
s ⎣ ij i ⎦ (3)
j=1 j=1 j=1
j=i j=i j=i

|Vi | Vj
 where
Tij = cos δi0 − δj0 (4) 
N
Xij
V4i−1 = gpf1j PLj
In Eq. 3, N is equal to the number of areas. In Eq. 4, Vi ,δi , j=1
and Xij show terminal voltage and phase of area i and reac- ..
tance between area i and j, respectively. In Fig. 5, Ri , Di , Hi , .
and βi are droop characteristic, equivalent damping coefficient,  N

inertia constant, and frequency bias of area i, respectively. V4i−n = gpfnj PLj (11)
Frequency bias is obtained using Eq. 5: j=1

1 Since the objective of this paper is to investigate the perfor-

β =D+ (5)
R
αik in Fig. 5 represents the participation factor of Genco k of
area i in load frequency control.
There can be various combinations of contracts between
each Disco and available Gencos. On the other hand, each
Genco can contract with various Discos. Generation partic-
ipation matrix (GPM) concept is defined to visualize these
bilateral contracts conveniently in the generalized model. The
GPM shows the participation factor of each Genco in the con-
sidered control areas and each control area is determined by
a Disco. The rows of a GPM correspond to Gencos and the
columns to control areas that contract power. In this study,
GMP matrix is considered as follows:
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ where μ = 17.01 and σ = 3.2.
gpf11 gpf12 gpf13 0.5 0.4 0.1
GPM = ⎣ gpf21 gpf22 gpf23 ⎦ = ⎣ 0.2 0.4 0.4 ⎦ (6)
gpf31 gpf32 gpf33 0.3 0.2 0.5
where gpfki refers to generation participation factor and shows
the participation factor of Genco k in the load following area i.
V1i in Fig. 5 is obtained as follows:
V1i = PLi + Pdi
where PLi and Pdi are local contracted and disturbance
mance of the proposed fuzzy controller for smart charging of
EVs, accurate modeling of photovoltaic system and its con-
trollers is neglected and only its output power is considered.
In each area, the output power of PV systems is aggregated. It
should be noted that this modeling does not affect the objective
of this study.
In this study, plug-in EVs are used for verifying the pro-
posed method in terms of the frequency control of grid.
According to National Household Travel Survey (NHTS)
2009 [16], arrival time and departure time of EVs follow
a normal distribution which can be expressed as follows:
1
Farr (t) = √ e−(t−μ)/2σ , 0 < t < 24
2
(12)
σ 2π
1
Fdep (t) = √ e−(t−μ)/2σ , 0 < t < 24
2
(13)
σ 2π
where μ = 9.97 and σ = 2.2.
For determining the initial SOC of EVs, it is essential to
know how much each EV travels before arrival to charging sta-
tion. For this purpose, EV’s daily travel range (d) is modeled
(7) as a lognormal distribution as follows [16]:
1 −
(ln d−μ) 2

loads of area i, respectively, and V2i is interface effects Fd (d) = √ e 2σ 2 ,d > 0 (14)
d 2π σ 2
between each control area and other areas, which is computed
where μ = 3.2 and σ = 0.9. Then, by using the following
as follows:
equation, initial SOC of EV is obtained:

N  
V2i = Tij fj (8) d
Sini = 1 − × 100 (15)
j=1 dmax
j=i
where dmax shows the maximum travel range of each
In Fig. 5, V3i is scheduled tie-line power, which can be EV. Based on a survey of European EV market, four types
generalized for an N control area as follows: of EVs are identified for the EV database [17]:
 L7e: Quadricycle-four wheels with the maximum unladen
V3i = (Total export power − Total import power)
⎛ ⎞ mass of 400 kg or 550 kg for goods-carrying vehicles;
 n
M1: Passenger vehicle with four wheels and up to 8 seats
 
N ⎜
n N
⎟ in addition to the driver’s seat;
= gpfkj PLj − ⎜ gpf ⎟PLi (9)
⎝ jk ⎠ N1: Goods-carrying vehicle with four wheels and maximum
j=1 k=1 k=2 j=1
j=i j=i laden mass of 3500 kg;
N2: Goods-carrying vehicle with four wheels and maximum
V4i is a vector that includes the contracted demands of other
laden mass between 3500 kg and 12000 kg.
DISCOs from GENCOs of area i.
  As can be seen in Table I, M1 type EVs has more popu-
V4i−1 V4i−2 · · · V4i−n (10) larity. In this study this type of EV is considered. Different
FALAHATI et al.: SMART DEREGULATED GRID FREQUENCY CONTROL
Fig. 6. EV battery used as distributed energy source [18].
battery technologies such as NiMH, Li-ion, and lithium poly-
mer can be employed for EVs [3]. In this paper, there is no
concentration on the type of battery technology and an ideal
battery with no losses is supposed for EVs. These assumptions
have no effects on the objective of this study. Battery capacity
of M1 type EVs has a gamma distribution as follows [17]:
1 c
α−1 − β
fcap (c) = c e (16)
β α (α)
where α = 4.5 and β = 6.3. Maximum and minimum capacity
of M1 type EV’s battery is 72 and 10 kWh, respectively. It is
supposed that typical energy required for a car to drive a mile
is 0.25 kWh [3]. According to Eq. (16) and constant factor of
0.25 kWh/mile, dmax can be found.
In this paper, the total number of EVs was assumed 30000;
i.e., 6% of the number of M1 type EVs in Table I. Each
area was also supposed to have 10000 EVs.
As mentioned before, EV charging is carried out by bidi-
rectional power electronic converters. A schematic diagram of
a battery and a bidirectional converter coupled with the dis-
tribution node via line reactance X is represented in Fig. 6.
Power delivered by the battery storage can be written as:
SEV = VI ∗ (17)
where
E∠δ − V∠0
I= (18)
jX
In (17) and (18), SEV and I are the power and current sup-
plied by the battery, respectively. E and V are the voltages
at the sending and receiving ends, respectively. δ is the angle
between E and V. X is the line reactance between the con-
verter and the utility node. It can be demonstrated that active
and reactive powers are obtained as [18]:
EV sin(δ)
PEV = (19)
X day. Assuming that typical energy required for a car to drive
E2 − EV cos(δ)
QEV = (20)
X approximately 9 kWh per day. With respect to the capacity
It has been assumed that power electronic converters are
controlled so that QEV = 0. V2G implementation using fuzzy
logic controller has been designed at a system level. Due
1077
to slow dynamics that there are in study system, convert-
ers have not been modeled in simulations. Battery SOC is
calculated by:
Q1 − Q2
SOC = (21)
Q1
where Q1 represents battery capacity and Q2 is output energy.
III. D ESIGN OF C ONTROLLER
In this study, the fuzzy controller has two inputs. As can be
seen in Fig. 3, two variables of SOC of battery and frequency
deviation of gird are inputted to fuzzy controller. In the next
step, with respect to these inputs and the corresponding mem-
bership functions and fuzzy rules, charging and/or discharging
power of each EV battery is determined. Fig. 7 represents the
membership functions of variables. In Fig. 7(A), frequency
deviation membership function is shown. Input frequency
deviation is fuzzified into the corresponding fuzzy signals with
seven linguistic variables: very low (VL), medium low (ML),
small low (SL), medium (M), small high (SH), medium
high (MH), and very high (VH). In Fig. 7(B), battery SOC
membership functions are displayed. Input SOC is fuzzified
into the fuzzy regions with five linguistic variables: very
low (VL), low (L), medium (M), high (H), and very high (VH).
In Fig. 7(A) and (B), upper, lower, and middle limits are con-
sidered constant and parameters a, b, c, d, e, and f are regarded
as optimization variables. They are optimized using ICA so
that the following fitness function is minimized:

F = |f |tdt (22)
using the following limits:
−0.4 ≤ a ≤ −0.2; − 0.2 ≤ b ≤ 0; 0 ≤ c ≤ 0.2
0.2 ≤ d ≤ 0.4; 20 ≤ e ≤ 40; 60 ≤ f ≤ 80
The aforementioned parameters are optimized by ICA as
follows:
a = −0.3; b = 0; c = 0.16; d = 0.25; e = 28.19; f = 60.
Membership functions of power are represented in
Fig. 7C. The power is fuzzified into nine fuzzy regions repre-
sented by linguistic variables: very negative high (VNH), neg-
ative high (NH), negative medium (NM), negative low (NL),
zero (Z), positive low (PL), positive medium (PM), positive
high (PH), and very positive high (VPH). In this figure, the
negative sign means that battery is charged. Membership func-
tions of power are attained by both analysis and trial-and-error.
Fuzzy rules of fuzzy controller are presented in Table I.
With respect to the daily travel range of EVs (Eq. (14)) and
μ = 3.2 miles [16], an EV travels approximately 36 miles per
a mile is 0.25 kWh [3], the required energy for each EV is
of batteries (Eq. (16) with α = 4.5 and β = 6.3), it can be
found that most of M1 type EVs have batteries with capacity
of approximately 28 kWh [17]. Also, 50% SOC for battery
1078 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 9, NO. 2, MARCH 2018

Fig. 7. Membership functions; A) Grid frequency deviation, B) Battery SOC, C) Power.

TABLE II
F UZZY RULES OF C ONTROLLER

means 14 kWh. So, if EV is charged to 50%, it is sufficient
for it to travel its daily range. Moreover, it is noteworthy to say
that EV owners pay for contribution in the frequency control of
grid and, therefore, minimum reasonable SOC is sufficient for
them. However, EV owners can inform EVSE from its desired
final SOC value and, therefore, fuzzy rules of fuzzy controller
can be changed according to this value. So, fuzzy rules of
Table II are obtained assuming that 50% SOC is sufficient for
EVs. These rules are achieved logic and analysis. Fuzzy rule
i in this controller is expressed as follows [19]:
Rule i: IF f is Lx and SOC is My , THEN PI is Zl
x = 1, 2, . . . , 7, y = 1, 2, . . . , 5, l = 1, 2, 3, . . . , 9 (23)
where Lx and My denote the antecedents and Zl is the
consequent part. fuzzy controller’s output PI is calculated by:

35 
35
PI = ωi Zl ωi (24)
i=1 i=1
where ωi denotes the grade for the antecedent and is
obtained by:
ωi = ωfi ωSi (25)
where ωfi and ωSi are the grade of antecedents for each rule.
IV. S IMULATION R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSION
In this section, the performance of the proposed method in
nine case studies by the simulations in MATLAB/SIMULINK
is evaluated.
A. Case Study 1
There are several charging strategies to charge EVs, namely
dumb charging, dual-tariff, smart charging, V2G charging,
etc. In this study, to investigate the proposed method, the
system shown in Fig. 5 is considered and EV charging is
carried out using the proposed method and dumb charg-
ing. In dumb charging, after the last trip of the day or
when a charging point is available, EVs typically connect
to gird and, without any consideration, begin to charge. For
each area, a lumped variable load is assumed. The 3 kW
power limit is assumed for charging and discharging of
EVs. Frequency deviations for all the areas are represented
in Fig. 8. As can be seen in Fig. 8(A-C), using the pro-
posed method, frequency deviations in all areas are reduced
significantly. Using dumb charging, maximum frequency devi-
ations of areas 1, 2, and 3 are -0.2147Hz, 0.2318 Hz,
and -0.2061Hz, respectively; but, by utilizing the proposed
method, they are 0.0623 Hz, 0.0574 Hz, and 0.0746 Hz,
respectively, which approximately shows 71% frequency devi-
ation reduction in area 1, 75% in area 2, and 64% in
FALAHATI et al.: SMART DEREGULATED GRID FREQUENCY CONTROL 1079

TABLE III
M AXIMUM AND RMS VALUES OF F REQUENCY AND T IE L INE P OWER D EVIATIONS

Fig. 8. Frequency deviation; A) Area 1, B) Area 2, C) Area 3. Fig. 9. Tie line power deviation; A) Area 1, B) Area 2, C) Area 3.

area 3. Tie line power deviations in three areas are pre- the proposed method, tie line power deviations are reduced
sented in Fig. 9. It is obvious that the proposed controller approximately by 79%, 63%, and 68% in areas 1, 2, and 3,
reduces tie line power deviation properly so that, using respectively.
1080 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 9, NO. 2, MARCH 2018

In Table III, values of maximum frequency and tie line

power deviations along with their RMS values are presented
for the proposed method and dumb charging. RMS values are
calculated by:


1  N
RMS =  ui (t)2 (26)
N
i=1

where N represents the number of samples and u(t) is consid-

ered signal. It can be found that, using the proposed method,
RMS values of frequency and tie line power deviations for all
the areas are reduced significantly. Using the proposed method,
RMS values of frequency deviations of areas 1, 2, and 3 are
reduced by 87%, 88%, and 86%, respectively. With respect to
Table III, it can be found that, using the proposed method, tie
line power deviations are reduced by 81%, 73%, and 79% in
areas 1, 2, and 3 compared with dumb charging, respectively.

B. Case Study 2
In order for the comparison, the proposed method was com-
pared with V2G controller of [8] in the presence of solar units
and variable loads in IEEE 39 bus deregulated power sys-
tem. In Fig. 10(A-C), frequency deviations of areas 1 to 3 for
a range of time is shown, respectively. As can be seen, using
the proposed method provided a better response than the V2G
controller in [8] so that maximum frequency deviation of the
areas using the proposed method was less than the one by
V2G controller of [8]. RMS values of frequency deviations of
areas by the proposed method and V2G controller of [8] are
given in Table IV. It can be found that, by using the proposed
method, RMS values of frequency deviations of areas 1 to 3
were decreased 39%, 41%, and 38%, respectively.

C. Case Study 3
To investigate the effect of the proposed method on sudden
loss of a generation unit, it is assumed that, at the instance of
the fifth second, a solar unit in area 1 is disconnected from
the grid. It is shown in Fig. 11 that, by using the proposed
method, EVs can support the grid to prevent the high decrease
of grid frequency, while by dumb charging, all the areas suffer
high frequency deviations. In Fig. 12, tie line power deviations
of the areas for the proposed method and dumb charging are
displayed. It is shown that, by using the proposed method with
loss of solar unit in area 1, the grid is not subjected to high
tie line power deviations, but by dumb charging, deviation
of tie line power deviations is high. In order to compare the Fig. 10. Frequency deviation; A) Area 1, B) Area 2, C) Area 3.
proposed method with dumb charging, maximum and RMS
TABLE IV
values of the frequency deviations of all areas are given in RMS VALUES OF F REQUENCY D EVIATION
Table V, and maximum and RMS values of tie line power
deviations of all the areas are summarized in Table VI.

D. Case Study 4
In this case study, it is assumed that a solar system with the
capacity of 0.1 pu is connected to area 1 at the instance of
tenth second. Frequency deviations of areas 1 to 3 are shown well. For more verification, maximum frequency deviation val-
in Fig. 13. As can be seen in Fig. 13, in this scenario, the pro- ues of all the areas with the proposed method and with dumb
posed controller could control frequency deviations properly as charging are given in Table VII. It can be found that, when the
FALAHATI et al.: SMART DEREGULATED GRID FREQUENCY CONTROL
Fig. 11. Frequency deviation due to the disconnection of a solar unit;
A) Area 1, B) Area 2, C) Area3.
solar unit is connected, the grid suffers from frequency devia-
tion as 0.2724 Hz, 0.3136 Hz, and 0.3153 Hz in areas 1 to 3,
respectively, but by using the proposed method, the proposed
maximum frequency deviations of areas 1 to 3 by the connec-
tion of the solar unit are reduced to 0.1323 Hz, 0.1458 Hz,
and 0.1415 Hz, respectively, which shows frequency devia-
tion reduction by 51% in area 1, 54% in area 2, and 55% in
area 3.
E. Case Study 5
In this case study, performance of the proposed method is
compared with dumb charging when a big load of 0.3 pu
1081
Fig. 12. Tie line power deviation due to the disconnection of a solar unit;
A) Area 1, B) Area 2, C) Area 3.
is applied to area 2 at the instance of fifteenth second
and the results are given in Fig. 14 and Table VIII. When
dumb charging is used, frequency of areas 1 to 3 is reduced
by 0.5078Hz, 0.5645Hz, and 0.5694 Hz. This low fre-
quency can cause the activation of under frequency relays;
although in this paper protection issues such as under fre-
quency relay have not been considered, as can be seen
in Fig. 14, by using the proposed method, areas 1 to
3 do not considerably suffer from negative frequency devi-
ation, which illustrates good performance of the proposed
method.
1082 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 9, NO. 2, MARCH 2018

TABLE V
M AXIMUM AND RMS VALUES OF F REQUENCY D EVIATIONS D UE TO THE
D ISCONNECTION OF S OLAR U NIT

TABLE VI
M AXIMUM AND RMS VALUES OF T IE L INE P OWER D EVIATIONS D UE TO
THE D ISCONNECTION OF S OLAR U NIT

TABLE VII
M AXIMUM VALUES OF F REQUENCY D EVIATION BY THE C ONNECTION OF
A S OLAR U NIT TO A REA 1

F. Case Study 6
To investigate the penetration level of EVs on the grid fre-
quency and verify the effect of the proposed method on it, four
cases are considered so that the total number of EVs can be
30000, 45000, 60000, and 90000. Simulations are carried out
in all the cases using the proposed method and dumb charging.
In Fig. 15(A-B), RMS values of frequency deviations of the
areas are shown using the proposed method and dumb charg-
ing. As can be seen, when using the proposed method, by
increasing the total number of EVs, the trend of RMS values
of frequency deviations is approximately decreasing. However, Fig. 13. Frequency deviation due to the connection of a solar unit; A) Area 1,
in dumb charging, with increasing the number of EVs, RMS B) Area 2, C) Area 3.
values of frequency deviation are increased, because EVs in
the proposed method have the role of a controllable load and TABLE VIII
generator and, therefore, could help the grid to decrease fre- M AXIMUM VALUES OF F REQUENCY D EVIATION BY A PPLYING A B IG
L OAD TO G RID
quency deviations, but in dumb charging, they are stiff and
uncontrolled loads that increased the burden of the grid.

G. Case Study 7
To investigate the performance of the proposed controller in
the control of SOC of EV batteries in the steady state, a step
load in all the areas is assumed in the absence of renewable
energies. It is noted that arrival and departure times are not that frequency deviation becomes negative. So with respect to
important in this case and there is enough time for charging the fuzzy rules of Table II, EVs with SOC of higher than 50%
EVs. By applying this step load to all the areas, it is found begin to discharge to the grid.
FALAHATI et al.: SMART DEREGULATED GRID FREQUENCY CONTROL
Fig. 14. Frequency deviations due to applying a big load to the grid;
A) Area 1, B) Area 2, C) Area 3.
TABLE IX
I NITIAL SOC AND C APACITY OF E ACH G ROUP OF EV S
If frequency deviation is assumed to be negative for enough
time, EV batteries have the SOCs of higher than 50% dis-
charge until reaching 50%. When frequency deviation of the
area enters the triangular membership function of Z (accord-
ing to Fig. 7(A)), EVs batteries with the SOC of less than
50% begin to charge according to the fuzzy rules of Table II.
This process continues until SOCs of batteries reaches 50%.
If after applying step load, frequency deviation is not negative
for enough time, the SOC of EVs batteries with the SOCs of
1083
Fig. 15. RMS values of frequency deviations by increasing total number of
EVs; A) Proposed method, B) Dumb charging.
Fig. 16. SOCs of EVs batteries after applying step load to all areas.
higher than 50% would not reach 50% exactly; however, they
are discharged to the grid. In this case study, one group of
EVs is assumed for each area. Initial SOC of EVs and their
capacities are given in Table IX. Fig. 16 shows the SOCs of
each group of EVs after applying step load to all the areas for
7200 seconds (2 h). It can be seen that EVs with the SOCs
of higher than 50% discharge to the grid and their SOCs are
reduced to 50% and EVs with SOC of below 50% reach 50%
after 2 h approximately. The SOCs of EVs with 50% initial
SOC do not change and remain at 50%.
H. Case Study 8
To investigate the performance of the proposed method for
the charging of EVs with different desired final SOCs, a two
area test system is assumed. In this case, it is supposed that
there are two EVs in area 2 with the same battery capacity
equaling 30 kWh and the same initial SOCs equaling 45% and
1084
TABLE X
F UZZY RULES OF C ONTROLLER FOR 60% F INAL SOC
Fig. 17. SOCs of EV 1 and EV 2.
Fig. 18. Changes of SOCs of EVs; A) With proposed method, B) With
optimized PI controller.
there is no EV in area 1. It is assumed that EV 1 needs 60%
final SOC and the desired final SOC of EV 2 is 50%. Since
EV 1 needs a different final SOC from 50%, different fuzzy
rules are used for it. In Table X, these fuzzy rules are given.
For EV 2 that needs 50% final SOC, fuzzy rules of Table II
are employed. In Fig. 17, the changes of SOCs of both EVs
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SMART GRID, VOL. 9, NO. 2, MARCH 2018
are shown. It can be seen that SOC of EV 1 reaches 60% in
the steady state, but SOC of EV 2 reaches 50% at last.
I. Case Study 9
To make a comparison, the proposed method is compared
with an optimized PI controller in terms of charging EVs.
PI controller is optimized by ICA algorithm. For this purpose,
a two area system as above is considered and it is assumed that
there is an EV with initial SOC equals to 55% in area 1 and
an EV with initial SOC equals to 45% in area 2. The battery
capacity of both EVs is supposed to be 30 kWh. Changes of
SOCs of EVs by using the proposed method and the optimized
PI controller in the period of about 3 h are shown in Fig. 18A
and 18B, respectively. With respect to Fig. 18A, it can be
seen that the SOC of EV with 55% initial SOC is reduced
and reaches 50% and the SOC of EV with 45% initial SOC is
increased and reaches 50% approximately. However, by using
the optimized PI controller (as can be seen in Fig. 18(B)),
there is no control on the SOCs of batteries so that SOCs of
EVs are reduced almost continuously.
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, in order to grid frequency control in the pres-
ence of EVs in a smart deregulated power system, a new V2G
method was proposed. In this method, EVs are controlled by
an optimized fuzzy logic controller. Two variables of SOC of
batteries and grid frequency deviation are considered as inputs
of optimized fuzzy controller. With respect to these inputs and
the considered membership functions and fuzzy rules, charge
or discharge power of EVs is determined. To investigate the
proposed controller in control of grid frequency, deregulated
modified IEEE 39-bus system in the presence of EV charg-
ing stations and solar energies was assumed. For frequency
analysis, this system was converted into a three area system.
Simulations were carried out in MATLAB/SIMULINK envi-
ronment. The results of the simulations illustrated that by using
the proposed method, frequency and tie line power deviations
of system were reduced considerably. To make a comparison,
the proposed method was compared with the V2G controller
of Ref. [8]. It was illustrated that the proposed method had
better performance in the control of frequency deviations than
V2G controller of Ref. [8].
In another section of the paper, performance of the pro-
posed controller in control of SOC of batteries in steady state
was discussed. It was shown that, by applying step load in
all the areas, EVs batteries with the initial SOC of higher
than 50% began to discharge, batteries with the initial SOC
FALAHATI et al.: SMART DEREGULATED GRID FREQUENCY CONTROL
of less than 50% began to charge, and EVs with the initial
SOC equaling 50% had no significant change. To verify the
performance of the proposed method for the charging of EVs
with different desired final SOCs, a two area system was con-
sidered and it was shown that attaining the desired final SOCs
can be possible by employing different fuzzy rules. Moreover,
the proposed method was compared with an optimized PI
controller in terms of charging EVs. For this case, a two
area system was considered with EVs with different initial
SOCs. It was illustrated that the proposed method could con-
trol the SOC of EVs batteries properly, while the optimized
PI controller could not.
R EFERENCES
[1] J. R. Pillai, “Electric vehicle based battery storages for large scale
wind power integration in Denmark,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Energy
Technol., Univ. Aalborg, Aalborg, Denmark, Dec. 2010.
[2] A. Dán, C. Farkas, and L. Prikler, “V2G effects on frequency regulation
and under-frequency load shedding in a quasi-islanded grid,” in Proc.
IEEE Grenoble PowerTech, 2013, pp. 1–6.
[3] R. Garcia-Valle and J. A. P. Lopes, Electric Vehicle Integration into
Modern Power Networks. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2013.
[4] H. Bevrani, Robust Power System Frequency Control, 1st ed. New York,
NY, USA: Springer, 2009.
[5] W. Kempton and S. E. Letendre, “Electric vehicles as a new power
source for electric utilities,” Transp. Res. D. Transp. Environ., vol. 2,
no. 3, pp. 157–175, Sep. 1997.
[6] W. Kempton and J. Tomić, “Vehicle-to-grid power fundamentals:
Calculating capacity and net revenue,” J. Power Sources, vol. 144, no. 1,
pp. 268–279, Jun. 2005.
[7] Y. Ota et al., “Autonomous distributed V2G (vehicle-to-grid) satis-
fying scheduled charging,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 1,
pp. 559–564, Mar. 2012.
[8] S. Vachirasricirikul and I. Ngamroo, “Robust LFC in a smart grid
with wind power penetration by coordinated V2G control and fre-
quency controller,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 371–380,
Jan. 2014.
[9] M. D. Galus, S. Koch, and G. Andersson, “Provision of load frequency
control by PHEVs, controllable loads, and a cogeneration unit,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 4568–4582, Oct. 2011.
[10] T. Masuta and A. Yokoyama, “Supplementary load frequency control by
use of a number of both electric vehicles and heat pump water heaters,”
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1253–1262, Sep. 2012.
[11] M. Datta and T. Senjyu, “Fuzzy control of distributed PV invert-
ers/energy storage systems/electric vehicles for frequency regulation
in a large power system,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 1,
pp. 479–488, Mar. 2013.
[12] H. Liu, Z. C. Hu, Y. H. Song, and J. Lin, “Decentralized vehicle-to-grid
control for primary frequency regulation considering charging demands,”
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 3480–3489, Aug. 2013.
[13] E. Atashpaz-Gargari and C. Lucas, “Imperialist competitive algorithm:
An algorithm for optimization inspired by imperialistic competition,” in
Proc. IEEE Congr. Evol. Comput., Singapore, 2007, pp. 4661–4667.
[14] S. A. Taher, M. H. Fini, and S. F. Aliabadi, “Fractional order PID
controller design for LFC in electric power systems using imperialist
competitive algorithm,” Ain Shams Eng. J., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 121–135,
2014.
1085
[15] M. M. Hadji and B. Vahidi, “A solution to the unit commitment problem
using imperialistic competition algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 117–124, Feb. 2012.
[16] J. Tan and L. Wang, “Assessing the impact of PHEVs on load frequency
control with high penetration of wind power,” in Proc. IEEE PES T&D
Conf. Expo., Chicago, IL, USA, 2014, pp. 1–5.
[17] Y. Mu, J. Wu, J. Ekanayake, N. Jenkins, and H. Jia, “Primary frequency
response from electric vehicles in the Great Britain power system,” IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1142–1150, Jun. 2013.
[18] M. Singh, P. Kumar, and I. Kar, “Implementation of vehicle to grid
infrastructure using fuzzy logic controller,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 565–577, Mar. 2012.
[19] M. Datta, “Fuzzy logic based frequency control by V2G aggregators,” in
Proc. IEEE 5th Int. Symp. Power Electron. Distrib. Gener. Syst. (PEDG),
Galway, Ireland, 2014 , pp. 1–8.
Saber Falahati Aliabadi was born in Kashan, Iran,
in 1987. He received the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in
electrical engineering from the University of Kashan,
Kashan, Iran, in 2010 and 2012, respectively. He
is pursuing the Ph.D. degree at the University of
Kashan. His research interests include power sys-
tem frequency control, smart grid, and renewable
energies.
Seyed Abbas Taher was born in Kashan, Isfahan,
Iran, in 1964. He received the B.Sc. degree in elec-
trical engineering from the University of Amirkabir-
Tehran in 1988, and the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees
in electrical engineering from the University of
Tarbiat Modares-Tehran in 1991 and 1997, respec-
tively. In 1996, he joined the Faculty of Engineering,
University of Kashan, where he has been a Full
Professor, since 2016. His current research inter-
ests include power system optimization and con-
trol design, analysis of electrical machines, power
quality, and renewable energy.
Mohammad Shahidehpour is a Carl Bodine
Distinguished Professor and the Chairman in the
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department,
Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago. He is the
author of over 300 technical papers and five books
on electric power systems planning, operation, and
control. He is an Honorary Professor at the King
Abdulaziz University in Saudi Arabia, North China
Electric Power University, and the Sharif University
of Technology in Iran.