energies
Article
A Resilient Prosumer Model for Microgrid Communities with
High PV Penetration
Kihembo Samuel Mumbere 1 , Yutaka Sasaki 1, * , Naoto Yorino 1,2 , Yoshifumi Zoka 1 , Yoshiki Tanioka 3
and Ahmed Bedawy 1,4
Citation: Mumbere, K.S.; Sasaki, Y.;
Yorino, N.; Zoka, Y.; Tanioka, Y.;
Bedawy, A. A Resilient Prosumer
Model for Microgrid Communities
with High PV Penetration. Energies
2023, 16, 621. https://doi.org/
10.3390/en16020621
Academic Editors: Juan C. Vasquez,
Gibran David Agundis Tinajero and
Yajuan Guan
Received: 1 December 2022
Revised: 22 December 2022
Accepted: 27 December 2022
Published: 4 January 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Energies 2023, 16, 621. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020621
1 Electric Power and Energy Systems Laboratory, Graduate School of Advanced Science and Engineering,
Hiroshima University, 1-4-1 Kagamiyama, Higashihiroshima 739-8527, Japan
2 National Institute of Technology (KOSEN), Kure College, 2-2-11 Agaminami, Kure 737-8506, Japan
3 Chudenko Co., 6-12 Koamicho, Naka-ku, Hiroshima 730-0855, Japan
4 Faculty of Engineering, South Valley University, Qena 83523, Egypt
* Correspondence: yusasaki@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
Abstract: Worldwide energy shortages and the green energy revolution have triggered an increase in
the penetration of standalone microgrids. However, they have limited generation capacity and are
wasteful when excess generated energy is curtailed. This presents an opportunity for the coordinated
operation of multiple prosumer microgrids that absorb this waste to enhance their resiliency and
reliability. This paper proposes a reliable prosumer model with an inbuilt energy management system
(EMS) simulator that considers the mentioned deficiencies for constructing resilient interconnected
prosumer microgrids. The EMS simulator operates in a real-time dynamic environment to coordinate
the prosumer components and performs flexible switching for (1) prioritizing critical load by shedding
the non-critical load and (2) meeting load demand locally or from other interconnected prosumers.
The EMS simulator maintains energy balance by setting limits for the battery energy storage system
(BESS) to preserve energy during low generation and performs real-time monitoring. The novelty of
this model lies in its simplicity and flexibility, which allows interconnected prosumer microgrids to
operate in cooperation without the need for communication. The proposed model is evaluated in a
post-disaster off-grid scenario using a single-phase average value model that considers reasonable
computation time. The simulation results of the proposed system indicate the preservation of stored
energy while maintaining critical resources beyond three days of poor weather conditions.
Keywords: energy management system; battery energy storage system; demand and supply balance;
photovoltaic system; reliability; resilient; prosumer
1. Introduction
1.1. Background and Motivation
The drive towards net-zero carbon emissions remains an important goal for govern-
ments worldwide. Recent statistics shared in [1–4] indicate the growth of renewable tech-
nologies globally, both as standalone entities that produce and consume energy (prosumers)
and as small-scale shared energy sources such as photovoltaic (PV) power generations,
often termed distributed energy resources (DERs). The authors attribute this progress to
the reduced costs of production driven by market growth and the adoption of supportive
policies.
The integration of DERs that include renewable energy sources, loads, and BESSs that
operate collectively as controllable units is termed a microgrid [5,6]. Microgrids can range
from simple and small to complex and large. A review of existing DER literature in [7,8]
reveals that the terms microgrid and minigrid are often used interchangeably. However,
various authors agree that the key differentiator is the size and capability of the DER. Since
there is no standard classification of the microgrid in terms of capacity or capability, this
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
 [7,8] reveals that the terms microgrid and minigrid are often used interchangeably. H
ever, various authors agree that the key differentiator is the size and capability of the D
Energies 2023, 16, 621 2 of 22
Since there is no standard classification of the microgrid in terms of capacity or capab
this article’s authors attempt to classify the position of the proposed model in term
capacity, size, and capability in relation to a power system in Figure 1. A nanogrid r
article’s authors attempt to classify the position of the proposed model in terms of capacity,
to home energy management systems (HEMS). While HEMS systems that are grid‐
size, and capability in relation to a power system in Figure 1. A nanogrid refers to home
nectedmanagement
energy but do not systems
sell power to the
(HEMS). gridHEMS
While exist, systems
this literature
that are defines the HEMS
grid-connected but equiv
prosumer
do referenced
not sell power in the
to the grid article
exist, as capable
this literature of two‐way
defines the HEMS power flow
equivalent in its grid con
prosumer
tion.
referenced in the article as capable of two-way power flow in its grid connection.

Figure1. 1.
Figure Classification
Classification of grids
of grids by capacity.
by capacity.

Researchers in [9–11] observe that increased penetration of DERs derives challenges,

Researchers in [9–11] observe that increased penetration of DERs derives challen
manifesting as voltage and frequency fluctuations, phase mismatches, and supply–demand
manifesting
imbalances that as voltage
could disruptand
powerfrequency
systems and fluctuations,
effectually reducephase mismatches,
their and supply
reliability. Despite
mand
these imbalances
challenges, manythat could disrupt
researchers contendpower
that assystems and effectually
a clean inexhaustible energyreduce their reli
source,
ity. their
with Despite
ease these challenges,
and inexpensive many researchers
deployment contend that
cost, and characteristic as ability
storage a clean inexhaustibl
through
their
ergybattery
source,energy
withstorage systems
their ease and(BESS), DERs stilldeployment
inexpensive offer a formidablecost,solution. Various
and characteristic sto
deployments as standalone solutions and supplements to consumer grid networks are
ability through their battery energy storage systems (BESS), DERs still offer a formid
increasingly prevalent and have proved beneficial to bridging the energy generation gap.
solution. Various
Concurrently, deployments
authors as standalone
in [12] observe solutions
that interconnected and supplements
systems to consumer
offer the advantages
networks
over are systems
standalone increasingly prevalent
of improved and
resilience andhave proved
reduced energybeneficial
losses, thustocost-saving
bridging the en
generation
through gap.
sharing resources. Particularly, the resiliency characteristic of DERs is essential
to power system collapse
Concurrently, prevention
authors in [12]during planned
observe thatand unplanned shutdowns
interconnected systems[13].offer the
Unplanned outages are becoming increasingly common worldwide,
vantages over standalone systems of improved resilience and reduced energy losses, caused by natural
disasters, common faults, and, more recently, cyber-attacks. The authors have shared
cost‐saving through sharing resources. Particularly, the resiliency characteristic of D
accounts of disaster-related power outages in [14–17], detailing immense losses to the
is essential
affected to power
communities. system
These collapse
researchers castprevention
light on the lackduring planned
of resilient powerand unplanned s
systems
downs [13]. Unplanned outages are becoming increasingly common
characterized by emergency backup systems to grid power supply should a disaster occur. worldwide, ca
by natural
Various disasters,
authors common
have proposed faults,
solutions and, more
to improve recently,ofcyber‐attacks.
the reliability The authors
the grid, for example,
the scheduled generation dispatch proposed in [11,13].
shared accounts of disaster‐related power outages in [14–17], detailing immense loss
the The authors
affected extensively explored
communities. the concept ofcast
These researchers “resilience”
light oninthe [15,16],
lackwho define a power
of resilient
resilient power system as flexible, robust, adaptable, and resourceful with prediction capa-
tems characterized by emergency backup systems to grid power supply should a dis
bilities. Moreover, the importance of storage systems is amplified to be critical to resilience
occur.
as energy Various authorsrecognition
market concept have proposedgrows. solutions
Noteworthy toisimprove the reliability
the dependence of DERs of on the grid
example, the scheduled generation dispatch proposed in [11,13].
external factors such as weather, which implies that, short of prediction methodology, their
The authors extensively explored the concept of “resilience” in [15,16], who def
resilient power system as flexible, robust, adaptable, and resourceful with predi
Energies 2023, 16, 621 3 of 22

BESS’s measured state of charge (SOC) is the true measure of the guaranteed output power
for a particular period. Therefore, the proposed prosumer model considers BESS SOC as
the basis for the resulting energy management system’s decision-making process. Within
this context, the proposed prosumer model and EMS ensure demand and supply balance in
standalone and interconnected prosumer modes while controlling system characteristics.
Microgrid operators often require approximate models of the basic system compo-
nents which manifest real system characteristics to design feasible interconnected power
systems. These approximate system models serve as test systems to iron out typical system
installation-related issues, including human errors, inconsistencies, cost, and time [18].
Therefore, if they were simplified, more flexible, and able to run fast and accurate simula-
tions, they would greatly aid the design process. Consequently, the developed prosumer
model adopts approximate average value models that significantly allow for reduced
‘practical’ simulation time during long steady-state simulations.

1.2. Related Works

The authors in [6,19,20] present an overview of microgrid architectures, definitions,
and control strategies in their definition of the single-bus topology adopted for this article
as the commonly used topology in microgrid systems. These authors also document the
concept of the prosumer model, at times referred to as a HEMS and commonly known as
a residential microgrid. Tables 1 and 2 present a summary of the proposed models from
various researchers selected for their close relation to our proposed model in terms of type,
objective, and key control parameters.
Arani et al. in [21] contend that microgrids are low- and medium-voltage network
distribution systems where the growth rate for the residential-type prosumer model type is
rapid. Their observation motivates this article’s single-phase approach to the inverter and
load modelling. In addition, an analysis of the published research in the two tables points
to little attention from researchers on single-phase modelling, with most of the research
focusing on three-phase systems, further warranting our proposed approach. In some of
this literature, researchers do not indicate the load types.
The literature review also shows that little emphasis has been put on load model
designs regarding mixed loads and exploring possibilities of partitioned loads for improved
load management. While some authors [22,23] include load shedding as part of their control
algorithms, only Michaelson et al. in [24] apply load shedding by separating it into critical
and sheddable non-critical loads. However, this author opts for an arbitrary load profile to
demonstrate the performance of the proposed algorithm, thus leaving their feasibility in
practical situations to question. Other authors explored a re-schedulable load modelling
approach to supply and demand balance which is demonstrated to even the balance curve.
Still, these authors ignore the control of characteristics such as frequency control, voltage
control, and phase matching of the generated load current and supply voltage that lead to
power loss and system instability.
Furthermore, in modelling their prosumer models, it is observed from Table 1 that the
objective of the research biases the design of the microgrid model. For example, the authors
in [22,23,25], whose objective is reducing the electricity bill’s cost, assume a balanced
system to perform optimized outcomes and thus ignore the characteristics of the electrical
components. This exclusion of system characteristics results in the inaccuracy of the results
of the proposed control algorithms. The papers with detailed voltage source controllers
(VSCs) in [26,27] either consider only active load or are three-phase VSC approaches,
such as in [28,29]. Most models from these tables that focus on pricing implement long
duration, i.e., 24 h or more, using average value VSC simulation designs but ignore system
characteristics.
By comparing this existing literature in Table 2, we observe the inconsideration of
energy sharing and increasingly often disaster occurrences in the model designs. Con-
sidering the rising applicability of energy-sharing systems to create the so-called energy
markets, energy sharing, with a bidirectional flow of power to and from the prosumer’s
 Energies 2023, 16, 621 4 of 22

installation, is imperative. However, few authors, such as [25], consider this advance-
ment in the prosumer model. The popularity of energy sharing is not just a result of the
interrelated financial gain but also a recently popular method for guaranteeing power
security against disasters. As disasters are increasingly common, their consideration in
prosumer designs, simulations, and test scenarios would significantly improve the results.
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW Accordingly, our proposed prosumer model employs load shedding, PV curtailment 4 of (PVC)
22
as demand and supply balancing methods, and voltage and phase matching control during
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 22
long steady-state simulations to ensure fast disaster recovery.
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 22
Table 1. Summary of Related Works: Objectives and model.
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW Table 1. Summary of Related Works: Objectives and model. 4 of 22
Table 1. Summary of Related Works: Objectives and model. Model
References Table 1.Objectives
Summary of Related Works: PV Objectives
and and model. Model Grid Con-
References Objectives VSC Type Model Load
BESS
PV and BESS VSC Type Gridnected
References Table 1.Objectives
Summary of Related Works: PV and and model.
Objectives Model Load Connected
Grid Con-
Energies [22]15,
2022, x
[22] FOR PEERLoad scheduling
REVIEW
Load scheduling for a reduced
for a reduced billbill X Average
VSC Type
Average Active
Load
Active 
X4Con-
of 22
References Objectives PV and
BESS Grid
nected
[23][23] Load
Loadscheduling
scheduling forfor a reduced
reducedbill
bill X VSC Type
Average Load
AverageModelActive
Active 
X
[22][24] Load scheduling for a reduced bill BESS
X Average Active11 nected

[24]
References Increase
Increase uptime
uptime
Objectives 
PVand Average
Average Mixed
Mixed Con-
Grid
[22]
[23][25] Load
Load
Loadscheduling
scheduling for
for
scheduling forfor aaa reduced
reduced bill
reducedbill
bill X Average
VSC Type
Average
Average Active
Load
Active
Active 
X
[25] Load scheduling reduced bill 
BESS Average Active 
nected
[23]
[24][26] Load Table
Demand 1.
scheduling Summary
for
and supply
Increase a
uptime
of Related
reduced
balance Works:
bill 
Objectives
X and model.
Average
Detailed
Average Active
Active 1
Mixed 

[26]
[22] Demand
Load and
scheduling supply
for a balancebill
reduced  Detailed
Average Active 

[24]
[25] [27] Load Demand and
Increasefor
scheduling supply
uptime balance
a reduced 
X Detailed
Average
Average ModelMixedActive 1 

[27]
[23] [28] Demand
Load and
scheduling
Demand and supply
for
supply a balancebill
reduced
balance bill X Detailed
Average
Detailed
Active
Active
Mixed 1,2 

X
[25]
[26]
References Load scheduling
Demand and for a reduced
supply
Objectives balancebill and

PV Average
Detailed Active11,2
Active 
Con-
Grid
[28]
[24][29]
[26]
Demand
Demand
Demand
and
andsupply
Increase
and
supply
uptime
supply
balance
balance
balance 
X Detailed
Detailed
Average
VSC Type
Detailed
Mixed
Mixed
Mixed
Load11
Active 

[27] [30] Demand
Demand and
and supply
supply balance
balance 
BESS
X Detailed
Average Active
Mixed 
nected

X
[29]
[25]
[27]
Demand
Load
Demand
and
scheduling
and
supply balance
for a reduced
supply balancebill 
Detailed
Average
Detailed
Mixed 1
Active1,2
Active 

[28]
[22] Demand
Power
Load flowand
scheduling supply
control
for bya balance
day-ahead
reduced bill 
 Detailed
Average Mixed
Active 


[30][31]
[26]
[28] Demand and
Demand and supply balance
supply balance X

Average
Detailed
Detailed
Detailed
Mixed 2 1
Active1,2
Mixed
Mixed 3
X

[29]
[23] Demand
Load schedulingscheduling
and supply
for a balance
reduced bill 
 Detailed
Average Mixed
Active
1 

[27] PowerSystem
flow control
Demand and
stabilityby
supply
by day-ahead
balance
treating BESSsched- 
 Detailed Active 
3
[29]
[31][32]
[30]
[24]
Demand
Demand and
and
Increase
supply
supply
uptime
balance
balance X
 Detailed
Average
Detailed
Average
Mixed
Mixed
121
Active1,2
Mixed 1 


[28]
[30] Demand
Demand and
thermal
and
uling
supply
constraints
supply balance
balance 
 Detailed
Average Mixed
Mixed 1 

[25] Power
Loadflow control
scheduling by in day-ahead
for a reduced sched-
bill  Average Active212 
[29]
[31] System
System
Demand stability
stability
and by
supplygrid-forming
treating BESS
balance  Detailed Mixed 3

[32][33]
Energies 2022, Power flow control by day-ahead4 sched-
uling X

Detailed
Detailed Mixed
Active2 4 of 22
X

[31]15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
[26]
[30] Demand
thermal
Demand
applications
and
and supply
constraints
supply balance
balance
of 22
 Detailed
Average Active
Mixed
Mixed 1 
43 of 22
Energies 2022,
The
[27]15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
proposed Energy
System
Demand and uling
preservation
stability by
supply during
treating 4 of 22
low
BESS
balance  Detailed Active2 
[32]
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER
method
System
Power
REVIEW
System
stability
flowstability
control
4 of 22 by
generation
in day-ahead
grid-forming
byperiods 4 sched-
treating BESS of 22 

X Average
Detailed Mixed
Active22 43 of 22
X

[33]
[31]
[28] thermal constraints
Demandapplications
[32]15, x FOR PEER REVIEW and supply Detailed
balance Mixed 1,2  Detailed Mixed
Active 

4 of 22
Energies 2022, 1 uling 2 thermal constraints 3
d Works: Objectives [29] and model. Energy SystemTable
Demand stability
Three-phase,
1. Summary
and supply in grid-formingSingle-phase,
ofbalance
Related Buying.
ofWorks: 
Objectives and model.
Detailed Mixed 1 
Energies
The 2022,
[33]15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
proposed System
System
preservation
stability
stability by
in treating during
grid-forming
4low
BESS 22  Detailed Mixed 2 

4 of 22
dFOR
Works:
PEER
EnergiesObjectives
REVIEW [32]
2022,
[30]
[33] 15, and
x FORmodel.
PEER REVIEW Table
Demand 1. Summary
applications
and supply of Related
balance4 ofWorks:
22 
Objectives
 4andAverage
of model.
Detailed
22
Average
Detailed Model 4Mixed
Active
of
Mixed 22
2
12 4 of 22

nd
dFOR
Works:
model.
method
Objectives and model. Modelgeneration
thermal
TableTable1. 2.constraints
Summary
periods
Summary of of Related
Related Works:
Works: Control
Objectives Parameters
and model. and Features.
PEER
EnergiesREVIEW 2022,
The proposed 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Energy applications
preservation during low4 of 22 4 of 22 4 of 22 4 of 22
Power flow
Model
System control
1 Three-phase,
stability by in2 day-ahead
Single-phase,
grid-forming sched-
3 Buying.
 Average Model4Mixed
Mixed 22 
FOR PEER References
PV
EnergiesREVIEW
Themethod and
[31]
2022, 15,
proposed
[33] and x FOR PEER REVIEW Table
Energygeneration1. Summary
Objectives
preservation periods
of Related
Grid
during low4Con-
ofWorks:
22 PV 
Objectives
 and 4and
of model.
Detailed
22
Detailed of
Mixed 22 2 
Grid 4Con-
3 of 22
dFOR
Works:
PEER
EnergiesObjectives
References
PV
REVIEW Model VSC Type
model. Model
and15, x FOR PEER REVIEW applications
2022, Table Load
1. uling
Summary
Objectives Grid of Related
Control 4Con- Works:
Parameters
of 22 
Objectives
PV and VSC
and
andFeatures
4 of 22
Type
Average
model. Model Load
Mixed
4 of 22
2
Grid 4Con-
of 22
BESS method VSC Type generation
Load periods nected BESS VSC Type nected
dFOR
1.Works:
Summary
PEER
EnergiesObjectives
References
PV
REVIEW of
and
2022,Related
Table
15, and
1.Works:
x FORSummary
model. System
PEERObjectives
REVIEW
1 Three-phase,
ofGrid stability
Related
Table and2.
1.
4Con-
ofWorks:
Summary
model.
Objectives
22 Single-phase,
by2 Objectives
treating ofGrid BESS
Relatedand 3 Buying.
ofWorks:
4Con- model.
22 Control
and Parameters
Objectives
PV 4and model.
of 22 Model4 Load
and Features. of 22 Disaster
Grid 4Con-
bill
VSC Type BESS
The proposed
References
of[22]
[32] Average
VSC
Load Type Energy
Model preservation
Voltage/Frequency/
Load scheduling
Active
Load
1 Three-phase, for a Energy nected
during
reduced
2 Single-phase, low
Sharing
billmodel. BESS
 Average
Detailed
VSC
and Shedding Type Model4Mixed PV Active
Load  of 22
nected


22Buying.
3 Consideration
dFOR
1.Works:
Summary
PEER
EnergiesObjectives
References
REVIEW
BESS 2022,Related
Table
15, and
1.Works:
x FORSummary
model.
PEERObjectives
REVIEW of Related
Table and
thermal
nected 1.Works:
Summary
model.
Objectives
constraints Objectives of Related
4and
nected ofWorks: Objectives
PV Load
BESS 4andAverage
of model.
22 of 22
2
Grid 4Con-
nected of 22
bill
bill  [22]
method
 [23] Average
Average Load Phase
Model Control
scheduling
Active
generation for aa reduced
periods Model 
Con-bill 
and
Model Average
VSC Type Curtailment
Model4Active
Load 
4Con-
dFOR
1.Works:
Summary
PEER
EnergiesObjectives
References
PV
REVIEW of
and
2022,Related
Table
15, and
1.
x FOR PEERLoad
Works:
Summary
model. Objectives
REVIEW of scheduling
Related
Table Active
and1.Works:
Summary
model.
Objectives
2. for
Control
Objectives reduced
of Related
Grid andbill
ParametersWorks:
model. and Features
Objectives
Control
PV
BESS 4andAverage
Parameters
of model.
22 and Features. Active
of 22 Grid
nected of 22
bill
Average 
 [22] Active
Average
VSC Type Load System
Model stability
scheduling
Active
Load 1for
in2 Single-phase,
grid-forming
aa reducedModel 
 bill3 Buying.  and
Model Average
VSC Type Model Active
Load 12 

sdbill1.Works:
Summary
Objectives 
Objectives
References
PV
BESS
[23]
of
[24]
[33]
and [22]
Related
Table
References andAverage
1.Works:
Summary
model.
Average
Objectives Load
Objectives
PV of
andscheduling
Related
Table Active
1 Three-phase,
N/A and1.Works:
Increase
Mixed Summary
model.
Objectives
2. for Objectives
uptime
PV reduced
of Con-
Related
Grid
and nectedandbill
Works:
model. 
Objectives
Control
PV
BESS GridXCon-
andAverage
model.
Average
Parameters
Detailed and Features.
Grid Active
XCon-
Mixed
Disaster GridCon-

nected
Consideration
bill
Average  [22]
[23] VSC
Active Type
Average Voltage/Frequency/
Load
Load scheduling
Model 
scheduling
Active 1for
applications
VSC
Load Type for Energy
aa reduced
Model
reduced  bill
VSC
Load
bill Type 
and
Model Average
VSC
Load Type
Average PV ModelActiveLoad 1
Active 

snd dbill
1.Works:
Summary
model.PV
Objectives 
Objectives
References
BESS of
[24]
and
[25] [23]
Related
Table and
1.Works:
Summary
model.
Average
Objectives
Average Objectives
PV
Load
BESS of
and N/A
Related
Table and1.Works:
Increase
Mixed
scheduling Summary
model.
Objectives
Active Control
Objectives
uptime
for PVaa reduced
BESS of
Grid
and Con-
Parameters
Related

nectedand Works:
model.
bill Load andPV 
Features
Objectives
 Grid
Shedding
BESS XCon-
nected and model.
Average
Average GridXCon-
Mixed
nectedActive GridCon-

nected
bill  [22]
[23] Average
VSC Type Load
Load scheduling
Phase
Model Active
Control
VSC
schedulingLoad Type for
for a reduced
Sharing
Model
reduced  bill
VSC
Load
bill Type 
 Model Average
VSC
Load Curtailment
Type
Average Model Active
Load
Active 

sedbill
1.Works:
Summary
Average
Objectives The 
Objectives
References
PV proposed
of
[24]
and [24]
Related
Table and
1.Works:
MixedSummary
model.
Average
Objectives PV Energy
Objectives
of
and preservation
Related
Table and1.Works:
Increase
Mixed Summary
model.
Objectives Control
Objectives
uptime
PV during
of 
Parameters
Related
Grid
and low
and
Con- Works:
model. and 
Features
Objectives
PV Grid
and X and
Con- model.
Average GridX Mixed
Con- Grid
Con-
1 1 1
duling bill BESS
forLoad 
 [25]
aReferences
[26]
reduced
[22] Average
Detailed
scheduling
bill
Average forLoad
BESS
a scheduling
Demand
Voltage/Frequency/
Load reduced
2.
Active
Active
scheduling and Type
bill
Averagesupply for
for aa 
BESS reduced
Energy 
nected

balance bill
 Active  nected
Control
BESS
 Parameters
and Average
Detailed
and Features.
nected
PV Model Active
Disaster
Mixed
Active 2 
nected
Consideration

sebillbill
1. Summary
Objectives 
References
PV Model
[23]
of
and Related
Table
[24] VSC
1. Type
Average
[25]Active
Works:
Summary
Objectives Load
Objectives
PV Model
of
andRelated
Table VSC
scheduling
N/A andLoad
Active
1.Works:
IncreaseSummary
model.
Objectives for a reduced
Objectives
uptime
PV Model
reduced
of 
X
Related
Grid
and andbill
Con-
Average
VSC
Load
bill Type
Works:
model. and
 Model
Objectives
PV GridX Active
Con-
Average
VSC
Load Type
Average
model.
Average GridX Load
Active
Mixed
Con- Grid

Con-
1
Average BESS
aa  
method
 [25]
[22]
References
[26] Average
Detailed Load
BESS
aa  Demand 
generation
N/A
scheduling
Active
Active
and Type
supply for periods
a
BESS aa  
reduced 
nected bill
 Active

balance Load 
Shedding

BESS nected
Model  Average
Detailed  nected
 Active
Disaster
Active  
nected
Consideration

duling
duling bill for
seebill
Load
forPV
Objectives Load reduced
[22]
scheduling
[27]
reduced

References [23] bill
Average
[26]VSC
scheduling
[24]
and bill Type
Detailed
Average
Average
for
forPV
Objectives
Voltage/Frequency/
Load
Load reduced
 scheduling
Phase
Demand
Model
reduced
scheduling
Grid
and X bill
Average
Control
VSC
Load
Active
and
bill
Average
Increase
Mixed 1for
supply
Objectives
Con- for
Control
uptime  Energy
reduced
Sharing

balance
Model
reduced  bill
Average
VSC
Load
Active
bill Type
Average
Parameters and 

Features
XCon-Active
Average
VSC
Load Curtailment
Type
Detailed
Active
Average
Average
PV Model Con-
X Load 1
Active
Mixed 


2PV Grid
and Con- PV Grid
and Grid Grid
duling Detailed
bill for BESS
Loadaa  
 [25]
[26]
reduced
[22] Active
Detailed
scheduling
bill
Average for Load
BESS
Load
aa   scheduling
reduced
 Control
1 Three-phase,
Demand Active
scheduling
Phase N/A and Type
bill
Averagesupply
1for
for a
BESS aa  reduced

Single-phase, nected
balance
reduced
 
Sharing

bill
 Active
 bill3 Load
Buying.
Average 
Shedding
BESS


nected
Model 

Average
Detailed
Active
Average
Curtailment nected
 Model

Active
Active  Con-

nected



seeVSC
duling
ncreasebill Type
for
Objectives
bill
Load
uptime
References
PV 
[27]
reduced
[23]
[24]
and
[25] [27] VSC
Load
scheduling
[23]
[28] bill
Increase Type
Detailed
Average
Detailed
Average for
Objectives
Average
Load
uptime
PV Demand
reduced
and X
N/A
VSC
scheduling
Demand MixedLoad
Active
and
bill
Average
and
Increase
Mixed
Averagesupply
supply
1,2
Objectives for
uptime
PV balance
Model
reduced 
balance
Grid
and  
VSC
Load
Active
bill
Mixed
Con- Type
Average
Average1 PV  Grid
and
 nected
  VSC
Load
Active
Con- Type
Detailed
Average
Detailed
Mixed
Average1 Grid
 nected Load 1,2
Active
Mixed
Mixed
Con- 1 Grid
Con-

 nected
duling
e bill
ebill
duling Detailed
for
BESS
forLoad
Load 

[22]
aaReferences
[26]
reduced
[22]
scheduling
[27]
reduced
[23]
[28] [28] bill
Average
VSC
Active Type
Detailed
scheduling
bill
Average
Detailed forLoad
for
BESS
Load
Loada
a  scheduling
nected
Demand
reduced
Demand
reduced
Active
and Type
Increase
scheduling
Voltage/Frequency/
 bill
Average
VSC
scheduling
Demand XMixedLoad
Active
and
bill
Average
and
supply
supply
11for
supply
1,2
for aa 
for BESS a
reduced
nected
reduced
 Energy 
balance


balance
reduced
 
balance
bill
Active
bill
Average
VSC
Load
Active
bill Type
Average1 PV
BESS

 
Average
 Active
Detailed
Active
Average
VSC
Load 1 PV Grid
Type
Detailed
Average
Detailed 
Active
Mixed
Disaster
Active
Load
Active 1,2 
Consideration



ncrease
s e
duling Objectives
ebill
uptime
for Load
aa 
BESS 
References [24]
[29]
reduced
[25] Increase
Average
Objectives
Detailed
scheduling
[24]
[22]
[26] bill
Average
Detailed
uptime
forPVaa 
Load
BESS and
Demand
reduced

Demand 
N/A
scheduling

Average
Objectives
Mixed
and
Active
bill
Average
Active
and supply
supply
uptime
PVaa 
for BESS and 
reduced
 
balance Mixed
Average
 Active
nected

balance bill Load
Average 
 Grid
and
Shedding
 nected
BESS 
Mixed
Con-Average
Detailed
Active
Average
Detailed   Con-
Mixed
nected
 Active
Active
11
 GridCon-

nected

duling
duling bill
Average
bill
eebill for
for
Detailed Load
Load a reduced
[22]
scheduling
[27]
reduced
[23] Active
bill
Average
scheduling
[23]
[28] bill
Average
Mixed
[29] Detailed
1,2 for
for Load
Loada reduced
 scheduling
Table
Demand
Phase
reduced
Demand N/A

scheduling
XMixedbill
Average
2.
VSC Summary
and
Control
Active
bill
Average
and 11for
Type
supply
supply
1,2 for a reduced
of  
Related
balance
Sharing
reduced
balance Active
bill
Average
Works:
VSC
Load
Active
bill Type
Average 
Control

  Active
Average
Parameters
VSC
Load 1 and
Type
Detailed
ActiveCurtailment
Average
Detailed  
Features.
 Load 1,2
Active
Mixed  

ncrease
duling
deebill
uptime
for
and supply Load
a aa 
 [24]
[29]
reduced
[25]
[30]
Demand
[26]
balance
Increase
Average
Detailed
scheduling
bill
Average
Detailed
and supply
uptime
for Load
a
BESSaa 
Demand
reduced
Demand
balance
Increase
Average
Mixed
scheduling and
Active
bill
Average
Mixed
Active supply
Detailed
and supply1
supply
uptime
for a
BESS aa 
reduced 

balance
balance
Mixed
Average
Active
bill
Average
 Active

1
Detailed 
BESS
 
nected

Mixed
Average
Detailed
Active
Average
 Active
Detailed  Mixed
nected
 Active
Mixed
Active
11
1 

nected


duling
duling bill
Averagefor
for Load
Load reduced
 [22]
scheduling
[27]
[25]
reduced
[23] bill
Average
Detailed
scheduling
[23]
[28] [30]Active
bill
Average forLoad
1for Load reduced
 scheduling
Demand
reduced
 
N/A
scheduling
Demand X bill
Average
Active
and
bill
Average
and 11for
supply for reduced
 

reduced
 

balance

balance bill
Average
Active
bill
Average 

  Average
Detailed
Active
Average
Detailed   Active1,2
Mixed  


ncrease
e
duling Detailed
bill
deesched-
uptime
for
and supply Load
supply a 
 [24]
[29]
reduced
[25]
[24]
[22]
[30]
Demand
[26]
balance
Increase
Average
Mixed
Detailed
scheduling
bill
Average
Detailed
and supply
uptime
for
supply Load
a 
Demand
reduced
 Increase

N/AMixed
scheduling
Demand
balance
Average
and
Active
bill
Average
Mixed
Active supply
Detailed
and 1,2 1
supply
uptime
for a
Control 
reduced
 
balance

balance
Mixed
Average
Active
bill
Average
 Active
Active
1
Detailed
Parameters 


and Features 

Mixed
Average
Active
Average
 Active
Active
1
Detailed
Detailed  

Mixed
Active
Mixed
Active
11
1  


duling
d
duling
e and
bill for
for Load
Load 
aa 
reduced
[22]
scheduling
Demand
[27]
balance
reduced
[23] bill
scheduling
[28] [31] bill
Average1for
Power
Detailed
and
Detailed for Load
Load aa 
reduced
scheduling
flow
Demand
balance
reduced
 scheduling
Demand Mixedbill
Average
control
Active by
Detailed
and
bill
Average
and 12for
supply
supply for aa 
day-ahead reduced 

balance
reduced
 
balance bill
Average
sched-
Detailed
bill
Average 
 
 Average
Detailed
Average
Detailed 
 Active
Mixed 1,2 


ncrease
duling Average
bill
Average
deesched-
uptime
forLoad
and supply
supply a 
 [24]
[29]
[31]
reduced
[25] Increase
Mixed
Average
Detailed
scheduling
[26]
[24]
[30]
Demand
[26]
balance bill
Mixed
Average uptime
1forLoad
Detailed
and supply
supply a 
Demand
reduced
 Increase
Mixed
Mixed
scheduling
Demand
balance
Average
and supply
Active
bill
Average
Active
Detailed
and 1for a 
supply uptime reduced
 
 
balance
balance
Mixed
3 Average
Active
bill
1
Average 
 Active
Active
Detailed 

  Mixed
Average
Active
 Active
Average
Active
1
Detailed
Detailed   Mixed
Mixed
Active1
Active
112
  
3
d
duling
d e and
and for Load
supply Demand
 [27]
balance
aReferences
reduced
[23]
scheduling
[25]
[23]
Demand
[28]
balance
[32] bill Power
Detailed
and
Detailed
and for
supply Load a flow
Demand
balance
reduced control
N/A Active
scheduling
Demand
balance
XMixedbill
Averageby
Detailed
and supply
uling
Detailed
and 112for
supply
1,2 day-aheada 
 
reduced 
balance
 

balance sched-
Detailed
bill
MixedAverage
Detailed
1,2 
 
MixedDetailed
Average
Detailed
1,2  
 Active
Mixed
Disaster
1,2  


Consideration
ncrease
e
duling bill
Average
deesched-
uptime
forLoad
and supply
supply a 
 [24]
[29]
[31]
reduced
[25]
[30]
Demand
[26]
balance
Increase
Average
Detailed
scheduling
Active
bill
Average
Detailed
uptime
forLoad
and supply
supply a 
reduced
 Increase
Voltage/Frequency/
Demand
scheduling
Demand
balance
Average
Mixed
and
Active
bill
Average
Active supply
Detailed
and supply
uptime
forday-ahead
a 
reduced
 
Energy 
balance
balance
Mixed
3 Average
Active
bill
Average
 Active
Active
1
Detailed 
  Mixed
Average
Active
 Active
Average
Active
1
Detailed
Detailed PV  Mixed
Active
Mixed
Active
112
1 
3
d
d eebilland
and supply Demand
 [27]
balance
[27]
[25]
Demand
[28]
balance
[33] Power
Detailed
and
Detailed
and supply  flow
Demand
balance
Demand
balance
X
control
N/A Active
Mixed by
Detailed
and supply
uling
Detailed
and supply
1,2  
 
balance

balance
X sched-
MixedDetailed
Load
Detailed
1,2 


Shedding
 MixedDetailed
Detailed
1,2 
  Active1,2
Mixed  

ncrease
ESS
d
duling and
dee Detailed
uptime
supply
Detailed
for
and supply Load
supplya  [24]
Demand
[29]
balance
[31]
reduced
 [25] Increase
Detailed
and
Mixed
scheduling
[26]
[24]
[30]
Demand
[26]
balance bill
Average
Active
uptime
supply
2for
Detailed
and supply
supply System
Load
a 
Demand
reduced
 
balanceIncrease


scheduling
Phase
Demand
Average
stability
Mixed
Detailed
and
3Active
bill
Average
Control
control
balance Mixed
Active supply
Detailed
and supply
112by uptime
for treating
a 
reduced

Sharing
balance 

BESS
balance Average
Mixed
3Active
bill
Average
 Active
balance Active
11
Detailed
Detailed 

  Average
Mixed
Active
Average
 Active
Active
11
Detailed
Curtailment
Detailed   Mixed
Active
Mixed
Active
112
1  3


d
d ee andand supply 
Demand
[27]
balance
[32]
Demand
[28]
balance
The Power
Detailed
and
Detailed
and
proposed supply  flow
Demand
balance
Demand
balance Active
Mixed by
Detailed
and supply
uling
Detailed
and supply
1,2 day-ahead 
 

balance sched-
MixedDetailed
Detailed
1,2 
 MixedDetailed
Detailed
1,2  Active1,2
Mixed 

ESS
d
duling
d e and
and supply
for Load
supply a 
Demand
 [29]
balance
[28]
[31]
reduced
[25] Detailed
and
scheduling
[26]
Demand
[30]
balance
[26] bill supply
Average
and for
supply
Detailed System
Load
a 
Demand

reduced stability
balanceMixed
scheduling
Demand thermal
balance
X Detailed
and
bill
Mixed supply 11by treating
constraints
Average
and
Active supply
Detailed for a 
 
reduced 
BESS
balance

balance
X Mixed
Detailed
Active
bill
 Active
Mixed
Average
Active
Detailed
11 


 
X Mixed
Detailed
Active
 Active
Mixed
Average
Active
Detailed
11 
 
X Mixed
Active
 Active
Mixed
121  3


X
d
d eesched-
Detailed
and supply
and supply 
Demand
[27]
balance
[32]
[27]
[25]
Demand
[28]
balance
[22]
methodActive Power
Detailed
and supply
Detailed
and supply  flow
Demand
Demand 
control
N/A
balance
N/A
balance Active
Mixed by
Detailed
and supply
uling
Detailed
and supply
1,2 day-ahead balance
 
 
balance
  sched-
MixedDetailed
Detailed
1,2 


 MixedDetailed
Detailed
1,2 
  Active
Mixed 1,2  

ESS
deeng
d and supply
and supply Demand
 [29]
balance Detailed
[31]
[30]
Demand
[26]
balance and supply
supply
Average
and System 
Demand

Demand stability
balance Mixed
thermal
balance Detailed
andconstraints
Mixed
Averagesupply
Detailed
and supply
1
2
1 by treating balance
  Mixed
BESS
balance
 3 Detailed
Mixed
Average
Active
Detailed
1
1 
 Mixed
 Detailed
Mixed
Average
Active
Detailed
1
1 Mixed
 Mixed
Active
1
2
1 3


ontrol
d
d eeesched-
and Power
by day-ahead
supply
Detailed
Detailed
and supply 
 flow
[29] control
Demand
[27]
balance
[32]
[27]
Demand
[28]
balance sched-
Active
Mixed Power
by day-ahead
Detailed
and supply
Detailed
and supply
1,2 
System
 flow
Demand
Demand 
balance

balancestability

control
Mixedsched-
Active by
Detailed
and supply
uling
Detailed
and supply
1,2 in day-ahead 
grid-forming
  
balance

balance sched-
Active
MixedDetailed
Detailed
1,2 

  Active
MixedDetailed
Detailed
1,2   Active1,2
Mixed  

d
deng and supply
and supply
supply 
Demand
 [29]
balance
[33]
[31]
[28] Detailed
and
[26] control
Demand
[30]
balance
[23] supply
Average
and supply
supply System 
Demand
 balance
Demand 
stability
Mixed
N/A
thermal
balance Detailed
and supply
andconstraints
Mixed
Averagesupply
12by treating
1  

balance
 

BESS
balance Mixed
Mixed
balance 3 Detailed
Average
12
1 


  Mixed
3 Detailed
Mixed
Average
12
1 
 
 Mixed
3
Mixed
12
1 
  3


ontrol
d
d eesched-
and
and Power
by day-ahead
uling
supply  flow
Demand
[27]
balance
[32]
Demand
[28]
balance sched-
and Power
by
uling
Detailed
and supply 
System
day-ahead
 flow
Demand
balance
Demand
balancestability
control
sched- by
Detailed
and supply
applications
Mixed uling
Detailed
and supply
1,2 in day-ahead 
grid-forming
 
balance sched-
Active
MixedDetailed
3 Detailed
1,2 
 Mixed
Active
Detailed
3 Detailed
1,2 Mixed
Active1,2 3

ESS
d
deng Detailed
and supply
and supply 
Demand
 [29]
balance
[33]
[30]
[31]
[28]
Demand
[30]
balance Mixed
Detailed
and supply
Average
1
and supply System 
Demand

Demand 
stability
balance Mixed
thermal
balance Detailed
and
Mixed supply
constraints
Average
and supply
121by treating  
 

BESS
balance
balance Mixed
essentially
 Detailed
Mixed
Average
112 

   Mixed
Mixed Detailed
Average
112   Mixed
Mixed
3 121  


ontrolsched- Power
byThe day-ahead flow
[32]
[29] control
sched- Power
by
Detailed
[27]stability System
day-ahead
 flow stability

control
sched-
Active
Mixed by
applications
DERs in day-ahead
grid-forming
are  
  sched-powered  electronic


  Detailed
systems  supported
  Activeby1,2 

121 information 

d
dow
ability
ESS
d and
and
and
uling
ee Averagesupply
by treating
supply
Detailed
supplySystem  [24]
Demand
[28]
balance
proposed
Demand
 [29] BESS
balance
[33]
[31]
Demand
[30]
balance
anduling
supply
Detailed
and
Mixed
Mixed supply
Average
and supply
Demand
 balance
Energy
21by treating
System Demand
 
balance
Demand 
thermal
balance
uling
Detailed
and
preservation
stability
BESS supply
Detailed
and
Mixed supply
constraints
Average
and supply
121by treating 
 balance
during  

balance

balance
Mixed
3 Detailed
low
BESS
Mixed
1,2
Detailed
Mixed
Average
121 
 Mixed
3 Detailed
Mixed
1,2
Detailed
Mixed
Average
121

Mixed
Mixed
3
Mixed  3and com-


ontrolsched- Power
by
uling day-ahead flow
[31]
[32]
[29] Average
control
sched- Power
by
Detailed
uling 
System
day-ahead flow 
stability
Mixed
control
sched-
Active by
Detailed
applications
municationuling
2 in day-ahead 
grid-forming 
technology
 sched-
Active
Detailed
applications. 
  Average
Active
Detailed
Therefore, 121 as
  Mixed
Active
DER penetration
2 
into 
3
d
dow
ability
ESS
rmal
engand byThe
supplytreating
System
andconstraints
supply proposed
Demand
[29]
[33]
[30]
[31]
method[28]
[25]
Demand
[30] stability
BESS
balance and
Detailed
thermal
balance by treating
supply
andconstraints
Average
supply System 
Energy
Demand

Demand preservation

stability
balanceBESS Detailed
and
Mixed
generation
N/A
thermal
balance supply
andconstraints
Averagesupply 21byperiods
treating 
during
 

 
balance low
BESS
balance Mixed
3 Detailed
Mixed
Average
121 


 Mixed
3 Detailed
Mixed
Average 
 
Mixed
3
Mixed
121 grid
 networks


ontrolsched- Power
by
uling day-ahead flow
[32] Average
control
sched- Power
by
Detailed
uling 
System
day-ahead flow stability
Mixed
control
sched-
Active by
Detailed
applications
uling
2in day-ahead

grid-forming 
 sched-
Active
Detailed   Average
Active
Detailed  Mixed
Active 2 
integrated.
dow
ability
ESS
rmal byThe
Detailed
and treating
System
constraints
supply proposed
[33]
method[32]
[30]
[31]
Demand
[30] stability
BESS
Mixed
Detailed
thermal
balance andconstraints
supply Energy
2by treating
System 
Demand preservation

stability
BESS
increases,
Mixed
3 Detailed
generation
thermal
balance andconstraints
Averagesupply 2byperiods
treating
2part
during
of 
balance

the low
BESS
3role
Mixed 3of
Detailed
Average 
 is
12the EMS toMixed
3 ensure
Detailed
Average  synchronization
12 smooth 
 Mixed
3 122 
when 
 3
ontrolse,
ability
ng
sched- in day-ahead
3 Buying.
Average
Power
by
uling 
grid-forming
System
flow
[32]
[31]
[29]
[26] stability
Mixed
Average
control
sched- 2in day-ahead
Power
by
Detailed
uling 
grid-forming
System
flow 
stability
1 Three-phase,
Mixed
control
 sched-
Active by
Detailed
applications
uling
2in Single-phase,
day-ahead 
grid-forming  
 sched-
Active Buying.
Detailed 

  Average
Active
Detailed 
  Mixed
Active 
 
3
ability
ESS
rmal by The
treating
System
constraints proposed
[33]
[31]
method stability
BESS Detailed
thermal by
constraints Energy
treating
System  preservation
stability
BESS
Mixed
Detailed
generation
Phase-locked
thermal constraints 2by treating
periods during
loop   low
BESS
Mixed
3 Detailed
(PLL) techniques 2
 
are Mixed
3 Detailed popular
increasingly 2 
 3 synchronizing, 
Mixed
in 2 
monitoring,
ontrolse,
ability
ng 3
in day-ahead
Buying.
Power
by
applications
uling proposed
grid-forming
System [33] stability
flow
[32]
[31] control
sched- in day-ahead
Power
by
Detailed
applications
uling flow
grid-forming
System1


stability
Three-phase,
control
sched-
Active by
Detailed
applications
uling in day-ahead
2
 
Single-phase,
grid-forming   3
sched-
Active Buying.
Detailed   3Active
Average
Detailed  Mixed
Active22  

ow
ability
ESS
rmal byThetreating
System
constraints [31]
[33]
method[32]
[30]stability
BESS Detailed
thermal
[27] constraints Energy
by treating
System preservation

 1 Three-phase,
stability
BESS
Mixed
thermal
and Detailed
generation constraints
controlling 2by treating
2periods
during
  low
 grid-connected
BESS
Mixed
Detailed 2 

 Mixed
inverter-based Detailed
DERs. 2  PLLs
  Mixed
3
are preferred 
 3 they are
because
se,
ability
ng
d Detailed
Works: in
3 Buying.
applications
uling Control 
grid-forming
System
[32] stability
Average
Active
Detailed
Parameters in
and
applications
uling 
grid-forming
System 
Features.
Tablestability
Mixed
Active
Detailed
2. Summary
applications
uling
2in Single-phase,

grid-formingof 

Related 3 Buying.
Active
Detailed
Works: 
Control  Average
Active
Detailed
Parameters and 
Features.Mixed
Active 2 

ed
ow
ESS
rmaleservation
ability byThe
The treating
System
constraints proposed
Energy
during
proposed
[33]
method[32] preservation
low
stability
BESS
method
Detailed
thermal by treating
System
constraints  1 Three-phase,
Energy
during preservation
low
stability
BESS
Mixed
Detailed
generation
thermal constraints 2by treating
2periods  
during
  low
BESS
Mixed
Detailed 2 

 Mixed Detailed 2 
 Mixed 22 
 
ability
ng
d Works: in Control
applications 
grid-forming
System [33]
[32]
[31] stability
Average
Detailed
Parameters
[28] in
and
applications 
grid-forming
System
Features.
Table
stability

Mixed
Average
Active
Detailed
2. Summary
applications 2in Single-phase,

grid-formingof  

RelatedMixed 3 Buying.
Average
Active
Detailed
Works: 2 


Control  Mixed
Average
Active
Detailed
Parameters 2 

and 
Features.Mixed
Active  

ed
ow eservation
ability
neration
rmal byThetreating
System
periods
constraints proposed
Energy
during
[33]
method preservation
low
stability
BESS Detailed
generation
thermal byperiods
treating
System
constraints  1 Three-phase,
Energy
during preservation
low
stability
BESS
Mixed
Detailed
generation
thermal constraints 2by treating
2periods  Parameters
during  low
BESS
Mixed
Detailed 2  Mixed Detailed 2 Mixed 22 
metersse,
ability
ng
ameters
d Works: in
3 Buying.
and
and
applications Control 
grid-forming
System
Features
[33]
[32]
Features. stability
Average
Parameters in
and
applications 
grid-forming
System
Features.
Table
stability
Mixed
Average
Detailed
2. Summary
applications 2in 
Single-phase,
grid-forming
Control of  
RelatedMixed 3 Buying.
Average
Active
Detailed
Works: 

2and Features
Control  Mixed
Average
Active
Detailed
Parameters 2 
and 
Features.Mixed
Active  

ed
ow eservation
neration
rmal The
Detailed The
in2periods
constraints proposed
Energy
during
proposed
[33]
method preservation
low
method
Mixed
Detailed
generation
[32]
thermal
[29] 2
in2periods
constraints  Three-phase,
Energy
during 
preservation
low
Mixed
Detailed
generation
thermal constraints 2
2periods  this
during
 low
Mixed
Detailed 2 

  Mixed
Detailed 
2 2,
2 Mixed 2 
  of
metersse,
ability
ng
e-phase,
3 Buying.
and
applications proposed
Single-phase,
grid-forming
System stability
1 Three-phase,
Features 3 Buying.
Average
applications  1Table
Single-phase,
grid-forming
System stability
By
Mixed comparing
3 Buying.
Average
2. Summary
applications 2in Single-phase,
grid-forming
Control low
of Related existing
Parameters
Mixed 3 Buying.
Average
Works: literature
2and Features
Control 
 Parameters
in Table
Mixed
Average andwe Mixed
observe
Features. the 22inconsideration 
ed
ow eservation
neration The The
in2periods [33]
Energy
during
References
proposed
method preservation
low
method
Detailed
generation 2periods
PV  1 Three-phase,
Energy
during 
preservation
lowDisaster
Mixed
Detailed
generation
Voltage/Frequency/ 2
2periods  Parameters
during
Consideration  MixedDetailed 2 
 Mixed Detailed 2  Mixed 2
Disaster  
Consideration
metersse,
ability
e-phase,
d 3 Buying.
Works:and
applications
Load Control proposed
Single-phase,
grid-forming
System [33] stability
1 Three-phase,
Features Parameters
[30]
Shedding in
3 Buying.
Average and
applications  energy
Single-phase,
grid-forming
System
Features.
Tablestability
Mixed 3 Buying.
Average
2. sharing
Summary
applications 2in ofEnergy
Single-phase,
grid-forming
Control and 
 low
RelatedMixed 3 Buying.
Average
increasingly
Works:
Load 2 often

2and Features
Control Mixed
 disaster Average
Parameters
Shedding occurrences 2 PV Mixed
 in the
2 and Features. model 
 Consid-
2 designs.
ed
ow eservation
neration The
2periods
Energy
during
References
[33]
method preservation
low
generation 2periods
PV
3 Curtailment Phase
Energy
during preservation
lowDisaster
Detailed
generation
Voltage/Frequency/
Control 2periods 
during
ConsiderationEnergy
Sharing Mixed
Detailed   Mixed
Detailed
Curtailment PV  Disaster
Mixed  of
Consideration
ed
ow
se,
e-phase,
d 3 Buying.
Average
2.Works:
Summary
applications
Load
eservation Control
The 
Single-phase,
of 1 Three-phase,
Shedding
Energy
during Mixed
Related
Table
Parameters
proposed
References 2. Buying.
Average
Works: 2
Summary
preservation
low and
applications Control 
Single-phase, 
1 Three-phase,
Features.
of
Energy
Disaster Consideration Related
Table By
Mixed
Parameters
ering
during 2. 3 Buying.
comparing
Average
Works:
Summary
applications
the
2
risingConsideration
preservation
lowDisaster
Control
andControl 
Single-phase, this
Features.
of 
Parameters
RelatedMixed
Parameters
applicability
3 Buying.
existing
Average
Works:
Load 2and
and 
literature
Features
Control 
Features.in Table
Mixed
Average
Parameters
Shedding
during low of energy-sharing systems to create the
2 2,
andwe 
observe
Features.Mixedthe
so-called
Disaster
 mar-
inconsideration
2
energy
Consideration
Energies 2023, 16, 621 5 of 22

typified by frequency, phase angle, and amplitude detection of the system voltage to ensure
the correct generation of a matched local reference current signal. This allows matching
the inverter current phase angle with the grid voltage phase angle to obtain a power factor
close to unity [34]. To this effect, PLLs of different types have been proposed by various
researchers to synchronize the injected current with the grid voltage. These techniques
include time delay PLL, inverse park transform PLL, enhanced PLL, and second-order
generalized integrators (SOGI)-PLL, among others. Amongst these, the SOGI-based PLL
is popular in single-phase applications, given its harmonic rejection capability, high accu-
racy, and fast response to grid variations [35,36]. However, a quadrature signal generator
(QSG)-SOGI is still unstable when its input signal contains frequency harmonic currents
and other harmonic components, as deliberated by the authors in [37]. Therefore, the
authors of this article implement the double SOGI-QSG PLL to match the generated current
phase angle to the prosumer supply voltage. The double QSG is preferred for its improved
harmonic rejection while maintaining simplicity [38], which enables its fast response during
switching and grid variations hence its applicability in long-duration simulations

1.3. Contributions
This study is an extension of the authors’ previous research [39–47] published in
various proceedings. The study develops a compressive prosumer model with an inbuilt
EMS simulated with MATLAB/Simulink Simscape. The contributions are summarized
below:
• Development of a prosumer model that includes PV generation, BESS, and electricity
load and can flexibly change its mode of operation according to supply and demand
conditions. The prosumer model incorporates further characteristic functions to
complement its operation that include:
• A PVC function that prevents excess generation;
• DC bus voltage control by using a proportional integrator (PI) controller;
• An improved electricity mixed load model based on actual measurement data using a
SOGI-QSG PLL for phase matching;
• System power security by separating critical and non-critical load through the non-
critical load shedding (NCLS) function.
• Construction of an EMS simulator that operates in a real-time dynamic environment
to coordinate the prosumer components and perform the following functions:
• Flexible load switching (FLS) function where the local generation meets the demand
or the demand switches to the external supply from cooperating prosumers during an
emergency, within the set BESS limits;
• Real-time monitoring, observation, and an alert warning system for system operation
by creating a colour-coding scheme for each operating mode.
The resulting system is a simple, flexible average value model that allows for the
interconnection of prosumers to form microgrids that operate in cooperation without the
need for communication, thus reducing the cost. In addition, potential revenue can be
realized from participating entities if cost incentives are included.

1.4. Paper Organization

The rest of the article is organized as follows: In Section 2, the proposed prosumer
model with a detailed description of the comprised components and its control scheme
is presented; in Section 3, the simulation design is presented, including the proceeding
simulation results and their discussion; finally, Section 4 concludes this article.

2. The Prosumer Model and Control Scheme

Figure 2 depicts the architecture of the adopted prosumer model. The structure
consists of a PV system with maximum power point tracking (MPPT) control to maximize
power generation as the primary power source and a BESS to store excess generation and
support the control of the DC bus to a constant 400 Vdc reference to which they both
 2. The Prosumer Model and Control Scheme
Figure 2 depicts the architecture of the adopted prosumer model. The structure con‐
sists of a PV system with maximum power point tracking (MPPT) control to maximize
power generation as the primary power source and a BESS to store excess generation and
support
Energies 2023, 16, 621 the control of the DC bus to a constant 400 Vdc reference to which they both con‐ 6 of 22

nect. Several converters, as depicted in the figure, are used. A unidirectional DC–DC con‐
verter (boost type) steps up the generated PV system voltage to 400 Vdc, the reference
voltage of the DCconnect. Several converters, as depicted in the figure, are used. A unidirectional DC–DC
bus. A bidirectional DC–DC (buck–boost) converter enables a two‐way
converter (boost type) steps up the generated PV system voltage to 400 Vdc, the reference
power flow to and from the BESS. The single‐phase VSC synchronous inverter from [33]
voltage of the DC bus. A bidirectional DC–DC (buck–boost) converter enables a two-way
converts the DC bus powervoltage,
flow to400
andVdc,
from tothe200 Vac,
BESS. The60single-phase
Hz. This voltage supplies an
VSC synchronous adjust‐
inverter from [33]
able single‐phase converts
load apportioned into non‐sheddable
the DC bus voltage, 400 Vdc, to 200 critical andThis
Vac, 60 Hz. sheddable non‐critical
voltage supplies an adjustable
loads through switch L (NCLS
single-phase function).
load apportionedTheinto
proposed prosumer
non-sheddable criticalmodel can interconnect
and sheddable non-critical loads
with other prosumersthroughonswitch L (NCLS
a private linefunction).
or grid forThebidirectional
proposed prosumerenergy model can interconnect
sharing through with
other prosumers on a private line or grid for bidirectional energy sharing through an ideal
an ideal transformer. Switch S implements the FLS function, where the demand can be
transformer. Switch S implements the FLS function, where the demand can be met locally
met locally or from the the
or from private line,
private line,depending
depending on onthethe operating
operating mode, mode, while Lswitch
while switch L the
implements
implements the NCLS function.
NCLS function.

Figure 2. The proposed prosumer

Figure model.prosumer model.
2. The proposed

2.1. The Battery Energy Storage System (BESS)

The BESS consists of the battery, its bidirectional DC–DC converter, and a DC bus
controller. The battery model is adopted from MATLAB/Simulink. The battery is assumed
to operate between 10% and 90% SOC for consistency in the battery characteristic and
to avoid overcharging and over-discharge, synonymous with reduced battery life. Lead-
acid type batteries are selected for their competitive cost and popularity. However, all
other battery operation-dependent factors such as temperature and power density are not
considered as the focus is mainly on the SOC.
Energies 2023, 16, 621 7 of 22

The battery is connected to a bidirectional DC–DC converter that enables charging

and discharging battery operations. The converter is of average value type, consisting of
controlled current and voltage sources. A duty cycle is generated by comparing the DC
bus reference voltage and measured voltage using a PI controller. As a result, the DC bus
is maintained at 400 Vdc. Equations (1) and (2) below represent the BESS and its DC bus
controller’s constraints.
i. Limitations of the BESS SOC (%):

i,min i i,max
SOCBESS ≤ SOCBESS (t) ≤ SOCBESS (1)
ii. Upper and lower bounds of DC bus voltage (V):

i,min i i,max
VDC ≤ VDC (t) ≤ VDC (2)
i ( t ): Electric load [kW] of prosumer i at time t,
where i: Prosumer number (1, . . . , NP ), PD
i,min i i,max
VDC : DC bus minimum voltage (V), VDC (t): DC bus voltage (V) at time t, VDC : DC Bus
i,min i
maximum voltage (V), SOCBESS : BESS minimum SOC (%), SOCBESS (t): BESS SOC (%) at
i,max
time t, SOCBESS : BESS maximum SOC (%).

2.2. The PV System

The PV array model from MATLAB/Simulink that inputs temperature and irradiance
data to generate the I-V characteristic is used. The input to the PV array is 5-minute data
that is interpolated into one-minute data. An array of 3 modules connected in parallel, each
string consisting of 13 modules connected in series, is adopted. The output of the PV array
i and a current I i . The resulting system has a rated output of 7.5 kW. The
is a voltage Vpv pv
PV system is fitted with an MPPT controller whose algorithm is shown in Figure 3, which
maximizes the PV output based on the incremental conductance algorithm. This algorithm
follows the principle that the PV characteristic curve has a gradient zero at MPP, which
results in Equation (3).
i (t)
dI pv i
I pv
i (t)
= − i
(3)
dVpv Vpv
The incremental inductance algorithm is a typical algorithm shown in Figure 3 where
vt and it are the instantaneous voltage and current, and vt−1 and it−1 are the values from
the previous time step. The MPPT controller generates the duty ratio that controls the
boost DC–DC converter’s output to the DC Bus. The converter is of average value type and
contains controlled current and voltage sources. The PV output upper and lower limits are
i,max i ( t ) is the PV
defined by Equation (4) where PPV is the maximum PV output (kW) and PPV
output (kW) at time t.
i i,max
0 ≤ PPV (t) ≤ PPV (4)
However, instead of depending solely on MPPT to control the boost DC–DC con-
verter’s output, this paper incorporates a PVC method, whose decision algorithm is shown
in Figure 3, as an alternate when the PV output is surplus. During PVC mode, a fraction of
i,max
the PV system’s rated output PPV is defined as the prorated new maximum power point,
i
PPVC of PV system output expressed by Equation (5). This new PPVC i is used as a reference
to calculate the next steps of input voltage vt−1 by defining a new reduced MPPPVC for the
gradient calculation in Equation (3). The SOC of the BESS at PVC SOCPVC i , above which
curtailment is implemented, is also set by Expressions (6) and (7). The EMS operator sets
these values through the proposed EMS simulator. Therefore, depending on the current
mode of system operation, the EMS controls the separating PVC switch to interchange
Energies 2023, 16, 621 8 of 22

between MPPT and PVC. The boundaries for implementing the PVC function are defined
by the Expressions (4) and (5)–(7) below.

i i i, max
PPV (t) ≤ PPVC ≤ PPV (5)

i,min i i,max
SOCBESS ≤ SOCPVC ≤ SOCBESS (6)
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 22
i,min i i
SOCBESS ≤ SOCBESS (t) ≤ SOCPVC (7)

Figure3.3.MPPT
Figure MPPTalgorithm,
algorithm,including
includingaaPV
PVcurtailment
curtailmentfunction.
function.

2.3. The Single-Phase

However, Synchronous
instead Inverter
of depending (SSI)on MPPT to control the boost DC–DC con‐
solely
verter’s
The output,
SSI usedthis paper
in this studyincorporates a PVC value
is also of average method,
typewhose decision
and consists of aalgorithm
controlledis
shown source
current in Figure 3, as
on the DC anside
alternate when the voltage
and a controlled PV output is surplus.
source on the AC During
side. ByPVC mode, a
combining
,
fraction
the outputof of
thethe
PVACsystem’s
side andrated
theoutput
input of 𝑃 the DCis defined
side with asthe
thereference
prorated voltage
new maximumvalues
power
of the DC bus 𝑃(400 Vdc)
point, of PVandsystemthe output
AC busexpressed
(200 Vac,by 60Equation
Hz), we can(5). This new a𝑃 dutyisratio
calculate used
as a drives
that reference
the to calculatebidirectional
inverter’s the next steps of input
energy conversion 𝑣
voltageoperation.by defining a newmodel
This inverter reducedis
𝑀𝑃𝑃
adopted for the
from gradient
in-house calculation
research in Equation
by Yorino (3).that
et al. [33] The directly
SOC of implements
the BESS at PVC 𝑆𝑂𝐶 ,
the dynamic
characteristics of synchronous
above which curtailment machines using
is implemented, theset
is also swing equation. (6) and (7). The EMS
by Expressions
operator sets these values through the proposed EMS simulator. Therefore, depending on
2.4.
the The Load mode
current Model of system operation, the EMS controls the separating PVC switch to
i i
The non-sheddable
interchange between MPPT andPPVC.
critical, andboundaries
critical The sheddable non-critical, Pnon
for implementing the PVC
−critical (t) loads are
function
separated
are defined bybyswitch L, a conventional
the Expressions circuit below.
(4) and (5)–(7) breaker, as shown in Figure 4. The circuit
breaker takes input commands from the EMS to control, its state through the NCLS function
as instructed by the proposed EMS. This 𝑃 𝑡article’s 𝑃 simulation
𝑃 uses the ideal switch available (5)
in MATLAB/Simulink. The load model inputs externally generated demand data, recorded
,
over time, to generate a current𝑆𝑂𝐶 𝑆𝑂𝐶the form
Ire f . It takes 𝑆𝑂𝐶of, a controlled current source (6) in
MATLAB/Simulink.
𝑆𝑂𝐶 , 𝑆𝑂𝐶 𝑡 𝑆𝑂𝐶 (7)

2.3. The Single‐Phase Synchronous Inverter (SSI)

The SSI used in this study is also of average value type and consists of a controlled
current source on the DC side and a controlled voltage source on the AC side. By combin‐
ing the output of the AC side and the input of the DC side with the reference voltage
 The non‐sheddable critical, 𝑃 and sheddable non‐critical, 𝑃 𝑡
loads are separated by switch L, a conventional circuit breaker, as shown in Figure 4. The
circuit breaker takes input commands from the EMS to control its state through the NCLS
function as instructed by the proposed EMS. This article’s simulation uses the ideal switch
Energies 2023, 16, 621
available in MATLAB/Simulink. The load model inputs externally generated demand 9 of 22
data, recorded over time, to generate a current 𝐼 . It takes the form of a controlled cur‐
rent source in MATLAB/Simulink.

Figure4.4.The
Figure Theproposed
proposedload
loadmodel.
model.

Inthe
In theproposed
proposedload loadmodel,
model,we wehave
haveconsidered
consideredboth boththe
theactive
activeandandreactive
reactivepower
power
componentsand
components andensured
ensuredthatthatthe
thephase
phase ofof
the the generated
generated current
current is matched
is matched withwith
thethe sup‐
supply
AC
plyvoltage. This This
AC voltage. is necessary because
is necessary the supply
because voltage
the supply source
voltage alternates
source between
alternates the
between
private line and the local prosumer source, and mismatched phases
the private line and the local prosumer source, and mismatched phases can cause insta‐ can cause instability in
the system.
bility in theBefore
system.combining the criticalthe
Before combining and non-critical
critical loads, we calculated
and non‐critical apparent
loads, we calculated
power.
apparentThepower.
combined
Thecritical and critical
combined non-critical load is then forwarded
and non‐critical load is thentoforwarded
the currentto reference
the cur‐
generator shown
rent reference in Figureshown
generator 4. Theinother
Figureinputs
4. Theto this
othercurrent
inputsreference generator
to this current are thegen‐
reference ac
voltage VACthe
erator are and
acthe voltage
voltage 𝑉 phase
and angle θ 0 . These
the voltage values
phase are𝜃generated
angle through
. These values arethe double
generated
QSG SOGI-PLL,
through whose
the double QSG open-loop
SOGI‐PLL, transfer
whosefunction
open‐loop is expressed by Equations
transfer function (8)–(11).
is expressed by
The QSG SOGI-PLL is thoroughly described by the authors in [34,48],
Equations (8)–(11). The QSG SOGI‐PLL is thoroughly described by the authors in [34,48], while the improved
double QSG
while the SOGI-PLL
improved from QSG
double [38], which
SOGI‐PLL uses from
a double
[38],SOGI-QSG,
which usesisa implemented
double SOGI‐QSG, for ouris
load model. The
implemented forequations below summarize
our load model. The equations the parameter design. the parameter design.
below summarize
𝑘 𝑘 𝜔′𝑠 k 1 k 2 ω 0 s2
𝐺𝐼 GI
𝑠 (s) = (8)
(8)
((s2 + k2 𝑠ω 0s +𝑘 ω𝜔′𝑠02 )(s2𝜔′
+ ω 0𝑠2 ) 𝜔′
where
where
ω𝜔n = 4.4 𝜁𝑡
4.4
(9)
(9)
ζts
𝜔
𝑘 ωn
𝜔′𝜁 (10)
k1 = (10)
ω 0ζ
4𝜁𝜔
𝑘 4ζωn 𝜔′ (11)
k2 = (11)
where 𝑡 is the selected settling time, 𝜁 the damping ω0 ratio, and 𝜔′ the centre frequency.
where ts is𝑉 the and
Voltage, selected
phasesettling
angle, time, the damping
𝜃′are ζcombined within ratio, and ω 0 reference
the current the centregenerator
frequency. to
Voltage, V and phase angle, 0 are combined within the current
generate 𝐼 , the current reference that drives the controlled current source block.
rms θ reference generator to
generate Ire f , normal
During the current reference
operation, thethat drivesatthe
demand controlled
time current
𝑡 is defined bysource
Equationblock.
(12). How‐
During normal operation, the demand at
ever, during NCLS, the total demand reduces to the critical time t is defined by
loadEquation
𝑃 (12).
only However,
since the
during NCLS, the total demand reduces to the critical load P i only since the non-critical
non‐critical load 𝑃 𝑡 is disconnected. Further limitations critical (13) and (14) are en‐
load i
Pnon (t) is function
disconnected.
forced by−critical
the NCLS which Further limitations
is implemented (13) and
through (14)L.
switch are enforced by the
NCLS function which is implemented through switch L.
𝑃 𝑃 𝑡 𝑃 𝑃 𝑡 (12)
i i i i
Pcritical ≤ PD (t) ≤ Pcritical + Pnon−critical (t) (12)

i i,max
0 ≤ Pnon −critical ( t ) ≤ Pnon−critical (13)
i i
0 ≤ SOCPV (t) ≤ SOCL1 (14)
i ( t ): Active load demand (kW), Pi
where PD i
critical : Critical electric load (kW), Pnon−critical :
i,max i,max
Non-critical load (kW), Pnon −critical : Maximum non-critical load (kW); PBESSdch : BESS dis-
charging maximum output (kW).
 Non‐critical load (kW), 𝑃 , : Maximum non‐critical load (kW); 𝑃 , : BESS dis‐
charging maximum output (kW).

2.5. The Proposed EMS Simulator

Energies 2023, 16, 621 10 of 22

The proposed EMS simulator redefines the BESS SOC operation area whose limits
are defined by equation (1) by dividing it into regions, as shown in Figure 5. New con‐
2.5. The Proposed EMS Simulator
straints 𝑆𝑂𝐶 and 𝑆𝑂𝐶 are introduced to the BESS SOC’s operation region, which
The proposed EMS simulator redefines the BESS SOC operation area whose limits are
modifies its operation to by
defined limit its depletion
equation during
(1) by dividing a disaster.
it into regions, as shown These limitations
in Figure are in‐
5. New constraints
i i
tended to prevent the
SOC BESS
L1 andSOCSOCL2 from being depleted
are introduced to the BESSduring
SOC’saoperation
disaster, withwhich
region, the assump‐
modifies
its operation to limit its depletion during a disaster. These limitations are intended to
tion that the prosumer is more concerned with maintaining uptime by drawing power
prevent the BESS SOC from being depleted during a disaster, with the assumption that
from the network rather than minimizing
the prosumer is more concerned cost,
withformaintaining
example,uptime
in a critical
by drawinginstallation
power fromsuch
the
as a hospital. Historical data on consumption can be analyzed to define the BESS SOC
network rather than minimizing cost, for example, in a critical installation such as a hospital.
Historical data on consumption can be analyzed to define the BESS SOC limits based on
limits based on the primary objective of the installation concerning uptime requirements.
the primary objective of the installation concerning uptime requirements.

Figure 5. Definition ofFigure

the BESS SOC of
5. Definition operating region.
the BESS SOC operating region.

Therefore, by setting a lower limit of BESS’s SOC SOCi , the EMS maintains the critical
Therefore, by setting a lower
load beyond limit period;
a prolonged of BESS’s SOC T𝑆𝑂𝐶
for example, = 3 days
L1
, the
for EMS maintains
the proposed case, a the crit‐
duration
ical load beyond a typically
prolonged period;
sufficient for availing initial relief 𝑇
for example, = 3 days
services shouldfor the proposed
an outage case, a
occur. The function
in Equation (15) defines the proposed EMS:
duration typically sufficient for availing initial relief services should an outage occur. The
function in Equation (15)T defines the T proposed EMS:
∑ Pcritical
i
(t) = ∑ ( PPV
i i
(t) + PBESS dch
i
(t) − PBESS ch
i
(t) + Pgrid i
(t) − Pnon −critical ( t )) (15)
t =0 t =0

𝑃 𝑡 𝑃 𝑡 𝑃 𝑡
The proposed 𝑃 SOC-based𝑡 EMS 𝑃 tool𝑡 maintains
𝑃 𝑡 demand balance based
supply and (15)
ℎ ℎ
on Equation (15) and the defined constraints (1), (2), (4)–(7), (12)–(14), and the following
additional constraints in (16)–(18). Expressions (16) and (17) are BESS power charging and
The proposed discharging constraints,
SOC‐based EMS tool while (18) is the constraint
maintains supply for FLSdemand
and control which takes effect
balance based when
on
the BESS SOC level is within the region defined by (19).
Equation (15) and the defined constraints (1), (2), (4)–(7), (12)–(14), and the following ad‐
i,min i i,max
ditional constraints in (16)–(18). Expressions
PBESS (16)
dch
≤Pand (17)
BESSdch (t) ≤are BESS
PBESS
dch
power charging (16)
and
discharging constraints, while (18) is the constraint
i,min i
for FLSi,max control which takes effect
PBESS ≤ PBESS (t) ≤ PBESS (17)
when the BESS SOC level is within the region defined by (19). ch
ch ch

i i
0 ≤ Pgrid (t) ≤ Pcritical (18)
,
𝑃 ℎ
𝑃 ℎ
𝑡 𝑃, ℎ
(16)
Energies 2023, 16, 621 11 of 22

i i i
SOCL2 ≤ SOCPV (t) ≤ SOCL1 (19)
i ( t ): Net power from the private line (kW), Pi,max : PV maximum output (kW),
where Pgrid PV
i,min i,max
PBESS : BESS discharging minimum output (kW), PBESS : BESS discharging maximum
dch dch
i,min i,max
output (kW), PBESS : BESS charging minimum output (kW), PBESS : BESS charging maxi-
ch ch
mum output (kW).
Additionally, Figure 6 is the proposed control flow through which the proposed EMS
makes decisions. The defined regions in Figure 5 of the BESS’s SOC operation range
determine the alert trigger points for the proposed control actions defined below with
different constraints for the BESS and PV system emphasized for each mode:
• Normal mode (Green): Under optimum conditions, the control algorithm maintains
the battery operating in the normal area. Here, the load demand is satisfied by the PV
and BESS power. The prosumer can also supply power to the private line in case of a
surplus in its generation. The expression (15) and its generally defined constraints (1),
(2), (4), and (12) for the system operation limits apply to this mode.
• PV Curtailment Mode (Blue): However, when the PV output is surplus to the require-
ments, i.e., when the BESS SOC, SOCBESS i i
(t) > SOCPVC and the PV system’s output,
i i
PPV (t) > PPVC , PVC function curtails the PV output to avoid system instability. The
prosumer operation range can gradually return to the normal mode through the PI
controller-enabled PVC function with pre-set parameters. During the PVC mode of
operation, the PVC function overrides the MPPT controller. Therefore, expression
(15) applies, but the PV and BESS constraints (5)–(7) are emphasized. Emergency
L1 Mode (Orange): If the BESS SOC SOCBESS i (t) level falls beyond the upper limit
i
value SOCL1 , NCLS mode follows, where switch L opens, the non-critical load is shed,
and only the critical load is supported. Therefore, a modified constraint (12) with
i
Pnon −critical (t ) = 0, and the BESS SOC constraint (14) are stressed.
• Emergency L2 Mode (Red): The EMS, through the FLS function, opens switch S below
the lower limit value, SOCL2 i . In this region, other cooperating prosumers connected

to the private line meet the critical load demand. The expressions in (18) and (19) take
priority.
• Critical Mode (Brown): The EMS engages the critical mode if the private line discon-
nects through an outage or lack of supply. The prosumer utilizes the remaining BESS
SOC by taking on normal mode operation but with Pgrid i ( t ) = 0 in expression 15 until

Emergency L1 mode is restored. However, if the private line reconnects during the
critical mode, Emergency L2 mode is instead assumed.
• System failure (Grey): System failure results if there is no PV output and the BESS
SOC is depleted beyond the minimum value. For network and prosumer equipment
safety, all loads are shed.
As illustrated in Figure 2, the EMS simulator communicates with components within
the prosumer model to ensure proper system operation. It executes the flow described in
Figure 6 for each iteration of the input conditions. The EMS simulator enables the creation
of cooperative interconnected prosumer microgrid systems in a distributed architecture
without the need for communication between them, providing a robust system that is resis-
tant to communication failures and potentially cost-effective to implement in microgrids.
In this simulation, we have not considered energy costs, but this will be an area of future
research.
Energies 2023, 16, 621 12 of 22
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 22

Figure 6. The proposed EMS simulator flow.

3. Simulation and Results

To ensure the consistency of our results, we assumed that the two prosumers
ures 6 and 7 were operating under identical weather conditions. Both prosume
designed with identical components, including a 7.5 kW‐rated PV system with a
lead acid BESS system with a 5‐h discharge rate, a 48 V nominal voltage, and a 17.4
Figure 6. The proposed EMS simulator flow.
rated
Figure 6.discharge
The proposed current. Theseflow.
EMS simulator components were modelled using the models prov
MATLAB/Simulink.
3. Simulation and Results We set the PVC value 𝑃 = 5 kW for the prosumer and the
3. Simulation
etersTo𝑑ensure and
and the Results
𝑑 consistency
in Figuresof5our and 6 were
results, weset to 1%that
assumed of the
the maximum
two prosumers BESS SOC. The
in Fig‐
was To ensure the consistency of our results, we assumed that the two prosumers in
ures operated
6 and 7 were at 60 Hz, and
operating undertheidentical
test cases assumed
weather a post‐disaster
conditions. situation.
Both prosumers were
Figures 6 and 7 were operating under identical weather conditions. Both prosumers were
Thewith
designed BESS settings
identical for each prosumer
components, including a were chosenPV
7.5 kW‐rated arbitrarily
designed with identical components, including a 7.5 kW-rated PV system with a 40 AH
system withanda 40are
AHshown i
lead
3. acid BESS system with a 5‐h discharge rate, a 48 V nominal voltage, and a 17.4 A/unit
leadProsumer X represents
acid BESS system installations
with a 5-h discharge that
rate, a 48 require
V nominal highand
voltage, BESS
a 17.4SOC
A/unit backups
rated discharge current. These components were modelled using the models provided in
prosumer Y represents
rated discharge those
current. These with minimal
components backup using
were modelled requirements
the modelsand a preference
provided
MATLAB/Simulink.
in MATLAB/Simulink. We set
We the
setPVC
the PVC 𝑃
valuevalue P=i 5 kW= for
5 kWthefor
prosumer
the and theand
prosumer param‐
the
ergy
eters trading.
𝑑 andd 𝑑and For this simulation,
indFigures 5 and 6 were energy
set to 1% trading
PVC and the
of the maximum BESSassociated
SOC. The tariffs
system were n
parameters 1 2 in Figures 5 and 6 were set to 1% of the maximum BESS SOC. The
sidered.
was operated at 60 Hz, and the test cases assumed a post‐disaster situation.
system was operated at 60 Hz, and the test cases assumed a post-disaster situation.
The BESS settings for each prosumer were chosen arbitrarily and are shown in Table
3. Prosumer X represents installations that require high BESS SOC backups, while
prosumer Y represents those with minimal backup requirements and a preference for en‐
ergy trading. For this simulation, energy trading and the associated tariffs were not con‐
sidered.

Figure
Figure 7.7.Simulation
Simulation setup.
setup.

Figure 7. Simulation setup.

Energies 2023, 16, 621 13 of 22

The BESS settings for each prosumer were chosen arbitrarily and are shown in Table 3.
Prosumer
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW X represents installations that require high BESS SOC backups, while prosumer
13 of 22
Y represents those with minimal backup requirements and a preference for energy trading.
For this simulation, energy trading and the associated tariffs were not considered.

Table 3. SOC Settings for Each Prosumer.

Table 3. SOC Settings for Each Prosumer.

Initial
Initial PVC
PVC 𝑺𝑶𝑪𝒊𝑳𝟏 𝑺𝑶𝑪𝒊𝑳𝟐
Prosumer
Prosumer SOCiL1 Value [%] SOCiL2 Value [%]
Value
Value[%]
[%] Value
Value[%][%] Value [%] Value [%]
X
X 80
80 80 80 65 65 60
60
Y 50 80 45 40
Y 50 80 45 40

3.1. Simulation
3.1. Simulation Conditions
Conditions
Various three‐day
Various three-day weather
weatherpatterns
patternsininFigure
Figure 8 were
8 were formulated
formulated fromfrom
the the sunny
sunny (S)‐
(S)-rainy (R)-cloudy (C) options in Figure 9a and were considered for the simulation.
rainy (R)‐cloudy (C) options in Figure 9a and were considered for the simulation.

Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 22

Figure 8. Three‐day
Figure 8. Three-day weather pattern possibilities.
weather pattern possibilities.

This figure’s temperature and radiance data were used to generate the corresponding
PV curves. When the simulation was run with day one as rainy in the third tree, it failed
because the demand exceeded the sum of the generated power and the energy stored in
the BESS, thus violating the constraints of Equation (15). Consequently, the feasible worst‐
case scenario was the cloudy‐rainy‐rainy pattern from the second tree used for the simu‐
lation.
Figure 9b includes the demand curves for the two considered prosumers. Following
the proposed load model, the data shows variable non‐critical and constant critical loads
used as input. The load data was fed into the proposed load model to generate the load
supply current. This load data was collected from the different floors of the electric power
and energy systems laboratory building at Hiroshima university and thus follows a typi‐
cal research facility profile. The weather data was collected from the building’s rooftop
over the summer. A comparative simulation was run for five test cases in Table 4, consid‐
(a) (b)
ering two disconnected and three scenarios where the two prosumers, X and Y, were con‐
Figure
Figure 9.
nected. (a)
(a) Three‐day
9.FLS weather
weather data.
is not applicable
Three-day (b)
(b) Three‐day
in disconnected
data. load
load profiles.
Three-daycases as there is no external power source.
profiles.
Test cases 1 and 3 are control cases for each connection status, where the NCLS for both
Table 4.
casesThis
andSummary
figure’s
the FLS of test cases.forand
temperature
function radiance
case 3 were data were used
disabled. to generate
Test cases 2 and the corresponding
4 are for the case
PV curves.
where onlyWhenNCLSthe simulation
was enabled,was andrun with
finally, day
test one
Prosumer X as
case 5 rainy
is in
the the
test third tree, Yit failed
Prosumerproposed
for the
Test Case
because
prosumer themodel
demandConnection
its EMS Status
andexceeded the sumPVC,
where of the generated
NCLS, power
and FLS and the
control areenergy storedFor
all enabled. in the
all
PVC NCLS FLS PVC NCLS FLS
BESS, thus violating
cases, the PVC was enabled.the constraints of Equation (15). Consequently, the feasible worst-case
1 was the cloudy-rainy-rainy
scenario Disconnected pattern  from the  second NA  for the
tree used  simulation.
NA
2 Disconnected   NA   NA
3 Connected      
4 Connected      
51 Connected      
1 The proposed method.

3.2. Simulation Results

 Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 22

Energies 2023, 16, 621 14 of 22

Figure 9b includes the demand curves for the two considered prosumers. Following
the proposed load model, the data shows variable non-critical and constant critical loads
used as input. The load data was fed into the proposed load model to generate the load
supply current. This load data was collected from the different floors of the electric power
and energy systems laboratory building at Hiroshima university and thus follows a typical
research facility profile. The weather data was collected from the building’s rooftop over
the summer. A comparative simulation was run for five test cases in Table 4, considering
two disconnected and three scenarios where the two prosumers, X and Y, were connected.
FLS is not applicable in disconnected cases as there is no external power source. Test cases
022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 1 and 3 are control cases 4 offor22 each connection status, where the NCLS 4 of for22 both cases and
the FLS function for case 3 were disabled. Test cases 2 and 4 are for the case where only
022, 15, xEnergies
FOR PEER2022,
REVIEW
15, x FOR PEER REVIEW (a) 4 of 22 4 of 22 4 of 22 4 of 22
NCLS was enabled, and finally, test case 5 is the test for the(b) proposed prosumer model and
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 22 4 of 22
ated Works: Objectives and Tablemodel.
1. Summary its
ofEMS
FigureRelated where
9. (a) Works: PVC,
Three‐day NCLS,and
Objectives
weather andmodel.
data. FLS control are
(b) Three‐day allprofiles.
load enabled. For all cases, the PVC was
enabled.
ated
Summary
Works: ofObjectives
Related Works:and
Tablemodel.
Objectives Model
1. Summary and
Tableofmodel.
Table Related
1.4.SummaryWorks:
Summary ofofObjectives
Related
test cases. Works: ObjectivesModel
and model. and model.
Summary ofPV
ferences Related
and Works: Objectives
Objectives andTable
Table model. Summaryofof
1.4.Summary test
Related
Grid
PV cases.
Con-
and Works: Objectives and model. Grid Con-
VSC Type Model Load Model VSC Type Model Load X
Prosumer Model
BESS Test Case Model nected
BESS
Connection nectedProsumer Y
ferences
bjectives PV References
and PVObjectives
and
Connection Objectives Grid
PV and
Prosumer Con- X Status
Grid
PV and Con- Model Grid
ProsumerCon- Y NCLS Grid Con-
ed[22]
bill Case
Load scheduling
Average for aVSC reduced
Active bill  Average PVC NCLS
VSCActive FLS Load 
PVC FLS
bjectives Test References
BESS
VSC PVType
and
BESS
Status
Load
Type
Objectives Load
nected
BESS
VSC Type
Grid
PV Con-
and
nected
BESS
Load
Type
nected Grid Con-
nected
ed[23]
bill  Load scheduling VSC
Average for a reduced PVC
Type
Active
1 bill NCLS

Load
Disconnected AverageFLS  VSC PVC

Type
Active NA NCLS

Load  FLS NA
ed
ing
[22]
bill
for a reduced  Load BESS
 Load  nected
BESS
  nected

[24] 1[22]
bill scheduling
Average for scheduling
Disconnected
Average
aAverage
reduced
Increase uptimeMixed
Active
2X bill
1for a reduced Active
 bill Average
Disconnected
AverageNA  Average
Active
X 1 NA Active

Mixed   NA NA
ing
ed
ing
[23]for
for aa reduced
bill reduced[22]bill 
 Loadfor scheduling
aAverage for
for aa reducedActive
X bill
 

 Average Active
 

ed[25]
bill 2[23]
Load
bill scheduling
Average
Load scheduling
Average
Load
Disconnected scheduling
Average
reduced
for a reduced
Active
Active
3
bill
X bill reduced
Active bill Average
Connected
 AverageNA

Average
Active
X

Active 
Active
X
 
NA

ing
ease for a reduced
[24] uptime [24]  [23]
3 bill 
 Load
Connected
Average
Increase uptimescheduling
Average
Average X
Increase for
Mixed uptimeMixed
1 a reduced
Active
 bill
1 Average

 Average
AverageX
Mixed 1 Active
Mixed 1 

nce
[26] DemandDetailed
and supply balance
Active  Detailed  Active
    
ease
ed
ing
[25] uptime
bill
for a reduced4[24] 
Connected
 Load aAverage 4X bill
Increase uptime MixedConnected
X bill
 1 
 AverageX MixedX 1
 

nce
[27] 5[25]
Load
bill scheduling
1 Demand
Average
Detailed
for scheduling
Average
reduced
and supply balance
Active
Active
for a reduced
Active
X
 Average
Detailed 
Average
Active
Active
 
Active
   
ing for a reduced Connected
 Load X X
 X X X

nd
nce
[26]
supply [25]
balance bill  scheduling
Average 5 1,2
1 for a reduced Active
 bill Detailed
Connected  Average Active

nce
[28] [26]Demand
DemandDetailed
and
Detailed
supply
Demand
and supply
Detailed
balance
Active
and
balance
Mixed
supply balance
Active
 Detailed
Detailed
Active1,2
Mixed
Active

nd
nd
nce supply balance
[27]
supply balance[26]
[27]  supply
 Demand 1 The
1Detailed
The and supply
proposed
proposedsupply method.balance
method.Active
 
 Detailed Active
 

nce
[29]  Demand
Demand
Detailed
and
Detailed
Demand Detailed
and supply balance
balance
Active
and
Mixed 1
balance
Active
 Detailed
Detailed
Detailed
Active
Mixed 1
Active

nd
nd
nce supply
[28] balance
supply balance [27]
[28]Demand 
Detailed
and Demand
 supply
Demand Detailed
Detailedand
balance
Mixed supply
and supply
1,2 balance
Active

balance
Mixed 1,2 
Detailed
 Detailed
Detailed
Mixed 1 1,2 Active
Mixed  1,2 

nce
[30]  Demand Average
and supply 3.2.
3.2. balance
Mixed
Simulation
Simulation
1
Results
Results  Average Mixed  1,2
nd
nd
nce supply
supply balance
[29] [28]
balance[29]Demand 
Detailed
and Demand
 supply
Demand Detailed
Detailedand
and supply
balance
Mixed supply
1 balance
Mixed  1,2
balance
Mixed 1 

Detailed Detailed
Detailed
Mixed 1 Mixed
Mixed 1 

ad sched- Power flow control by day-ahead sched-
nd
nd supply
[31]
nce
[30]
supply balance 
balance[29]
[30]Demand Average Demand
 supply
Detailed
and Demand Figures
Detailedand
Figures
Mixed
Average
balance supply
2 10–14
and supply balance
1 present
Mixed
balance
Mixed 
 3 11 the
present the
Average
three-day
three‐day

Detailed simulation
Detailed
simulation
Mixed
Average results
2results
1 of the
of 
Mixed
Mixed five
the
 test
3 11 five cases
test for pro-
cases
 for
uling sumers X and Y, respectively. All the graphs from top to bottom in each figure include the
nd
ad supply
rolsched- balance
by day-ahead [30]
Power sched-
flow control
Power Demand
by flow prosumers
Average
day-ahead and sched-
control X
supply
by and Y, respectively.
balance
Mixedsched-
day-ahead
1 Allthe graphs from
Average top to bottom
Mixed in each
1 figure include
BESS
[31]  SystemDetailed
[31] 
stability by treating
Detailed
power Mixed
thecontrol
power BESS
flow,2
DC
flow, BusMixed
DC Bus  3 2
voltage, load 

Detailed 3
supply and Detailed
Mixed
BESS SOC 2
with 
Mixed
colour 3 2
coding  3
described in
rol by day-ahead
[32]
uling  sched-Detailed Power flow Active by day-ahead  voltage,
sched- load supply andActive
Detailed BESS SOC with colour  2 coding described
[31]  uling
thermal Detailed
constraints
the
uling
proposed EMS Mixed
in 2
Section 2.5. 
 3 Detailed Mixed  3
uling
lity
BESS by treating BESS System stabilitySystem instability
by treating the proposed
uling
BESS by treatingEMS in Section 2.5.
BESS
ming
[32]  System
[32]
by treatingBESS Detailed 
stability
Detailed in grid-forming
Detailed
Active 
ActiveBESS Detailed  Detailed
Active 
Active 
lity
[33]
al constraints thermal Systemthermal Mixed by treating
stability 2 Detailed Mixed 2 
[32]  constraints
applications Detailed constraints Active  Detailed Active 
al constraints
ility
ming in grid-forming System stabilitySystem thermal
stabilityconstraints
in grid-forming in grid-forming
gproposed
low
[33]  Energy  System
preservation during low  2   2 
[33] Detailed Detailed
Mixed Mixed Detailed Detailed
Mixed 22 Mixed
2
ility in grid-forming
plications Average
applications stability
Mixed 2in grid-forming
applications  Average Mixed 
method [33] 
generation Detailed
periods Mixed 2  Detailed Mixed 2 
plications
gproposed
ervation
low 3 during The proposed
low
Energy preservation
Energy applications
during
preservation
low during low
hase, Buying. 1
 Energy
Three-phase, 2 Single-phase, 3 Buying. low Average   
low Average Average
Mixed Mixed Average
Mixed Mixed
2 2 2 2
ervation
method
ation periodsduring
Themethod
proposed generation periods preservation
generation during
periods
 Average Mixed 2  Average Mixed 2 
ation
ated 2periods
hase,Works:
phase, method3 Buying.
3 Single-phase,
Buying.
Control Parameters
Table 2. and
Summary
generation
1 Three-phase, 2 Single-phase,
1 Three-phase,
Features. of Related Works: 2periods
3 Single-phase,
Buying. 3 Buying.
Control Parameters and Features.
phase, 2 Single-phase, 3 Buying. 1 Three-phase, 2 Single-phase, 3 Buying.

rameters
ated
Summary and
Works: Features
ofControl
Related Parameters
Works:
TableControl
2. and Control
Summary
Features.
Parameters
Table Parameters
of Related
2. and
Summary and
Features.
Works: Features
ofControl
Related Parameters
Works: Control
and Features.
Parameters and Features.
Summary
eferences of Related Works: Control Parameters
Table 2. and
Summary
Features.
of Related
Disaster Consideration Works: Control Parameters and Features.
Disaster Consideration
gy
rameters
Control Voltage/Frequency/
and Shedding
Parameters
Features PV Control
and Features Energy
ParametersControl
and Shedding
Parameters
Features and FeaturesPV
Load Load
ng Control Parameters Phase Control
Curtailment
and Features Sharing Curtailment
Control Parameters and Features
eferences Energy
uency/
gy References
Voltage/Frequency/ Disaster
PV Consideration
Voltage/Frequency/
PV Energy Disaster Consideration
Energy PV Disaster
PV Consideration
Disaster Consideration
 [22] Load Shedding
 Load
References N/A Shedding
  Load
 Shedding

Disaster Load Shedding

Consideration  Disaster Consideration
uency/
trol
ng Energy Phase Control
Sharing Voltage/Frequency/
PhaseSharing
Curtailment ControlPV
Curtailment Energy
Sharing Curtailment PV
Curtailment
Load Shedding Load Shedding
trol
 [23] Sharing
 N/A Phase Control
Curtailment
 Sharing
  Curtailment 
 [22] 
[22] N/A  (a) N/A        (b) 
 [24] [22]
   N/A         
 [23] 
[23] N/A  Figure N/A
Figure 
10.
10. Test 11 (disconnected).
Test case
case 
  (a)
(disconnected). 
(a) 
Performance
Performance of 
ofprosumer
prosumer 
X.X.(b) 
(b)Performance
Performanceofof
prosumer Y.
 [25] [23]
 N/A  prosumerN/A Y.        
 [24] 
[24]            
 [26] [24]
     BESS
Positive   
power  
indicates 
discharge in the powerflow curve for each figure,
 [25] 
[25] N/A  N/A        
 [27] [25]
  whereas
N/A negative
 power
 denotes BESS
 
charging. Similarly,
 positive private

line power
 [26] 
[26]  
values  power
signify    
flow from the  line, whereas
private  negative
  power flow
flow means
 [28] [26]
  
towards  
the private 
line from  
the prosumer.   
 [27] 
[27]          
 [29] [27]
          
 [28] 
[28]          
 [30] [28]
          
 [29] 
[29]          
 [31] [29]
          
 [30] 
[30]          
 [32] [30]
          
 [31] 
[31]          
 [33] [31]
          
 [32] 
[32]          

oposed method[32]           
 Positive BESS power indicates discharge in the power flow curve for each figure,
whereas negative power denotes BESS charging. Similarly, positive private line power
values signify power flow from the private line, whereas negative flow means power flow
towards the private line from the prosumer.
Energies 2022,
Energies 16, x621
2023, 15, FOR PEER REVIEW In the disconnected test case 1 (Figure 10), the SOC of prosumer X was observed 1515ofof 22
22
to
reach 0% on day two due to its low initial SOC, high demand, and low power generation.
As a result, the system collapsed, considering that the generated PV power on the second
rainy day could not support the demand. However, prosumer Y successfully navigated
the three‐day simulation by consuming almost half the stored power in its BESS and the
generated PV Power.
Both prosumers in the disconnected test case 2 (Figure 11) show improved perfor‐
mance in the remaining SOC after three simulation days. All prosumers maintain uptime
and depict stable DC bus voltages compared to the control test case 1. This improved per‐
formance results from prolonged load shedding of the non‐critical load.
Without any form of demand and supply control or protection, test case 3 in Figure
12 fails on day two of the simulation. This is despite the power flow between the two
prosumers. At the failure instant, both prosumers cannot meet the total demand, and
therefore, this imbalance results in an unstable system. Contrarily, a stable system is ob‐
served in Figure 13 (test case 4), where a power flow between the two prosumers is ob‐
(a)served to supplement their performance. However, it is seen (b) that the SOC for prosumer
X operates far below our proposed lower limit 𝑆𝑂𝐶 45%, even with the prolonged
Figure 11.
11. Test
Test case
case 2 (Disconnected). (a)
(a)Performance
Performanceofofprosumer
prosumerX.X.(b)
(b) Performance of
Figure
load shedding and2 (Disconnected).
the constant power supply from prosumer Y. Performance of prosumer Y.
prosumer Y.

Positive BESS power indicates discharge in the power flow curve for each figure,
whereas negative power denotes BESS charging. Similarly, positive private line power
values signify power flow from the private line, whereas negative flow means power flow
towards the private line from the prosumer.
In the disconnected test case 1 (Figure 10), the SOC of prosumer X was observed to
reach 0% on day two due to its low initial SOC, high demand, and low power generation.
As a result, the system collapsed, considering that the generated PV power on the second
rainy day could not support the demand. However, prosumer Y successfully navigated
the three‐day simulation by consuming almost half the stored power in its BESS and the
generated PV Power.
Both prosumers in the disconnected test case 2 (Figure 11) show improved perfor‐
mance
(a) in the remaining SOC after three simulation days. All (b) prosumers maintain uptime
and depict stable DC bus voltages compared to the control test case 1. This improved
Energies 2022, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW per‐
16 of 22
Figure 12. Test
formance casefrom
results 3 (Connected).
prolonged (a)load
Performance
sheddingofof
prosumer X. (b) Performance
the non‐critical load. of prosumer
Figure 12. Test case 3 (Connected). (a) Performance of prosumer X. (b) Performance of prosumer Y.
Y.
Without any form of demand and supply control or protection, test case 3 in Figure
12 fails on day two of the simulation. This is despite the power flow between the two
prosumers. At the failure instant, both prosumers cannot meet the total demand, and
therefore, this imbalance results in an unstable system. Contrarily, a stable system is ob‐
served in Figure 13 (test case 4), where a power flow between the two prosumers is ob‐
served to supplement their performance. However, it is seen that the SOC for prosumer
X operates far below our proposed lower limit 𝑆𝑂𝐶 45%, even with the prolonged
load shedding and the constant power supply from prosumer Y.

(a) (b)
Figure 13. Test case 4 (Connected). (a) Performance of prosumer X. (b) Performance of prosumer
Figure 13. Test case 4 (Connected). (a) Performance of prosumer X. (b) Performance of prosumer Y.
Y.
In the disconnected test case 1 (Figure 10), the SOC of prosumer X was observed to
reach 0% on day two due to its low initial SOC, high demand, and low power generation.
As a result, the system collapsed, considering that the generated PV power on the second
rainy day could not support the demand. However, prosumer Y successfully navigated
(a)the three-day simulation by consuming almost half the stored
(b) power in its BESS and the
generated PV Power.
Figure 12. Test case 3 (Connected). (a) Performance of prosumer X. (b) Performance of prosumer
Y.
 (a) (b)
Energies 2023, 16, 621 16 of 22
Figure 13. Test case 4 (Connected). (a) Performance of prosumer X. (b) Performance of prosumer
Y.

(a) (b)
Figure 14. Test case 5 (Connected). (a) Performance of prosumer X. (b) Performance of prosumer
Figure 14. Test case 5 (Connected). (a) Performance of prosumer X. (b) Performance of prosumer Y.
Y.
Both prosumers in the disconnected test case 2 (Figure 11) show improved perfor-
The performance of our proposed prosumer model and its EMS depicted in Figure
mance in the remaining SOC after three simulation days. All prosumers maintain uptime
14 shows an increased flow of power from prosumer Y to prosumer X. This power flow
and depict stable DC bus voltages compared to the control test case 1. This improved
reduced the shedding
performance of the
results from non‐critical
prolonged loadload when of
shedding compared with theload.
the non-critical test case 4. There‐
fore, Without
prosumer X’sform
any SOCofremained
demand andverysupply
close tocontrol
its initial SOC at thetest
or protection, beginning
case 3 inofFigure
the sim‐
12
ulation. PVC was enabled for all test cases, but since the weather
fails on day two of the simulation. This is despite the power flow between the two conditions were the
worst‐case
prosumers.scenario, PVC isinstant,
At the failure not observable in the simulation
both prosumers cannot meet results.
the total demand, and
therefore, this imbalance results in an unstable system. Contrarily,inaFigures
Table 5 summarizes the results of the five test cases depicted 10–14. A
stable system is
comparison of the results indicates that the proposed interconnected
observed in Figure 13 (test case 4), where a power flow between the two prosumers prosumer model is
with its EMS
observed offers the best
to supplement theirperformance
performance. as However,
it maintains it isthe SOC
seen of the
that prosumer
SOC forXprosumer
at a rela‐
tively high SOC by the end of the three‐day simulation. i
X operates far below our proposed lower limit SOC = 45%, even with the prolonged
L1
load shedding and the constant power supply from prosumer Y.
TableThe
5. Summary of results.
performance of our proposed prosumer model and its EMS depicted in Figure 14
shows an increased flow of power from prosumer Y to prosumer X. This power flow
Test Case Prosumer Initial SOC (%) Final SOC (%) Result of Simulation
reduced the shedding of the non-critical load when compared with the test case 4. Therefore,
1
prosumer X’s SOCXremained very50 NA at the beginning
close to its initial SOC Unstable
of the(day 2)
simulation.
PVC was enabledYfor all test cases, 80 but since the weather
46.7 conditions were the
Stable worst-case
scenario, PVC is not observable in the simulation results.
2
Table X
5 summarizes 50 of the five testNA
the results
Unstable (day 3)
cases depicted in Figures 10–14. A
comparison of theYresults indicates80that the proposed 52.10 Stablemodel with
interconnected prosumer
its EMS offers the best performance as it maintains the SOC of prosumer X at a relatively
3 X 50 NA Unstable (day 2)
high SOC by the end of the three-day simulation.
Y 80 NA Unstable (day 2)
Table 5. Summary of results.

Test Case Prosumer Initial SOC (%) Final SOC (%) Result of Simulation
1 X 50 NA Unstable (day 2)
Y 80 46.7 Stable
2 X 50 NA Unstable (day 3)
Y 80 52.10 Stable
3 X 50 NA Unstable (day 2)
Y 80 NA Unstable (day 2)
4 X 50 7.3 Stable
Y 80 38.3 Stable
51 X 50 42.7 Stable
Y 80 40 Stable
1 The proposed method.
Energies 2023, 16, 621 17 of 22

3.3. Results Discussion

It is observable in the results that the proposed model successfully maintains the
system’s stability over three days under a pattern of abysmal weather, hence meeting the
research objective. The maintained high SOC of prosumer X could allow it to run the
critical load for an extra day, which would be ideal for essential facilities critical to disaster
recovery such as hospitals. Prosumer Y is a typical non-essential facility such as an office
building that maintains essential critical services by yielding their stored BESS’s SOC. It
could also benefit if revenue is levied on the shared power.
However, this observed system stability is a trade-off between uptime and prolonged
curtailment of a prosumer’s non-critical load plus the potential cost of purchasing power.
This article omits the costs associated with energy trading by assuming each prosumer pri-
oritizes uptime over cost. Therefore, a consensus approach to trading where the prosumers
are owned by the same entity with uniform or zero costing is ideal.
Nevertheless, the high amount of traded power, as seen in Figure 14, indicates an
opportunity for energy trading. Revenues from energy trading can offset the cost of
installation of prosumer microgrids which could encourage renewable energy growth in
line with the sustainable development goals agenda. Therefore, an economic viability study
is recommended to realize this potential.
The proposed alert warning system enables the system administrator to monitor the
system’s operation and also aids the planning process for disaster recovery. However, the
intended purpose is to share this basic information of colour codes with a proposed future
central control system which could better manage waste from curtailed PV power and
improve the efficiency of the proposed solution as part of our ongoing study.
The initial SOC of each prosumer can affect its performance curve, but it does not
impact system stability for successful days of good weather, as we shared in [44]. The
balance between supply and demand through energy trading, PVC, and FLS, supported by
the included DC bus control technique, ensures the stability of the power system. Therefore,
the initial SOC can take any random value between 0% and 100%. However, as shown
in Figure 8, cases where the weather on the first day was rainy were not able to maintain
uptime beyond the first day due to the high demand of prosumer X with a low initial
SOC. Maintaining a higher initial SOC for the BESS prior to a disaster could improve
post-disaster resiliency. Thus, prosumer owners should consider this requirement when
determining the lower BESS SOC limit for the proposed EMS.
Additionally, this result indicates that the performance of each prosumer is heavily
dependent on an interconnected prosumer’s willingness to participate cooperatively in
energy sharing and is highly susceptible to failure in the disconnected case. While some suc-
cessful situations exist, interconnected prosumers with the switching control will inevitably
become unstable after consuming all their remaining BESS’s SOC when operating in the
Emergency L2 Mode and critical modes. Therefore, when interconnected with multiple
prosumers, a separate generation system or BESS could be essential to buffer the periods
when the initial conditions of the PV generation and BESS SOC are low. Interconnected
prosumers with only PVC and NCLS can potentially sustain long periods of uptime, as
seen in the results of test case 3. The prosumers maintain balance by sharing power to
meet only their critical loads; thus, by the end of the simulation, both prosumers have their
remaining SOC almost depleted. If the generated power of the prosumers on day four
does not improve, it will inevitably result in instability. Therefore, this builds the case for
our proposed model that reduces the load shedding duration while maintaining the SOC
above the emergency operating region with remaining BESS’s SOC almost enough to run
for a fourth consecutive day of bad weather conditions. Ideally, relief services or weather
improvement will be in place after these three days.
To validate our proposed model, we conducted a stress test using the Monte Carlo
simulation in [44] to confirm the model’s performance under various initial BESS SOC
conditions. We also applied the model to a scenario involving a disaster occurring during
mid-operation in [42] and tested it in a large system comprising 11 prosumers and 5 con-
Energies 2023, 16, 621 18 of 22

sumers in an intercommunity microgrid setup in [41]. These tests all returned positive
results in terms of increased uptime, with input and output waveforms that approximated
those of typical systems. In addition, the inverter model proposed in this paper has been
experimentally tested in [33] and compared with existing models, demonstrating increased
stability compared to conventional models. Therefore, the simulation results presented
in this paper further validate the performance of our proposed model and confirm the
reliability of the proposed EMS method.

4. Limitations of the Study

The current study does not take into account the costs associated with energy sharing,
which could significantly impact power flow and decision-making in terms of scheduling.
Additionally, the study does not consider important factors such as AC side and network
voltage control, which are necessary for system stability. Therefore, in future work, we
propose to include additional data related to prosumer uptime optimization, dispatch
scheduling, uncertainties treatment, AC side voltage control, and demand and weather
prediction from [9–11,13,49–51] to further improve the effectiveness of the proposed energy
management system.
Additionally, we will explore the coordinated operation of multiple interconnected
prosumers using a quasi-central control method with minimal data sharing to evaluate the
potential benefits of improved energy utilization and network protection compared to a
distributed approach that prioritizes the needs of individual prosumers.

5. Conclusions
This article presents an approximate prosumer design for long-duration simulations
and its energy management system simulator that manages a prosumer’s BESS state of
charge, intending to increase its uptime. Reactive power components are included in the
load model while maintaining its applicability in long-duration simulations. In addition,
the design includes non-critical load shedding, PV curtailment, and flexible load switching
functions as demand–supply balance techniques to improve the prosumer’s resilience in
situations with limited generation.
When compared to the disconnected and connected cases without an EMS, the pro-
posed prosumer model with its EMS shows a resilient performance under extreme weather
conditions, which can significantly reduce the power generated. The proposed EMS suc-
cessfully prevents the system from operating in a critical mode and maintains the system’s
characteristics within acceptable levels. The three-day simulation run time of 19.5 min is
practical for long-duration simulation studies for microgrid operators, EMS suppliers, and
consulting firms.
This model is applicable as a test bench to further research on distributed energy
management systems due to its practical computation time and proximity to a real system.
Operators of microgrids can use it to plan for new installations and evaluate the existing
ones by entering only the system specifications [9–11,13,49–51].

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, K.S.M., Y.S. and Y.T.; methodology, K.S.M., Y.S. and Y.T.;
software, K.S.M. and Y.T.; validation, Y.S., N.Y. and Y.Z.; formal analysis, K.S.M.; resources, Y.S.;
writing—original draft preparation, K.S.M.; writing—review and editing, K.S.M., Y.S., Y.T. and A.B.;
supervision, Y.S., N.Y. and Y.Z.; project administration, Y.S. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: The data are not publicly available but can be provided on request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Energies 2023, 16, 621 19 of 22

Nomenclature

Main Symbols
ts Settling time
ζ Damping ratio
ω0 Center frequency
Vrms RMS voltage
θ0 Phase angle of the load supply AC voltage
Ire f The current reference
i
I pv PV output current
i Prosumer number (1, . . . , NP)
PD i (t) Electric load [kW] of prosumer i at time t,
PPVi (t) PV output
i
PBESS (t) BESS charging power
ch
i
PBESS (t) BESS discharging power
dch
i (t)
Pgrid Net power from the private line
i,max
PPV PV maximum output
i,max
PBESS BESS discharging maximum output
dch
i,max
PBESS BESS charging maximum input
ch
i,min
VDC DC bus minimum voltage
i (t)
VDC DC bus voltage
i,max
VDC DC bus maximum voltage
i
Vpv PV output voltage
MPPPVC Maximum Power Point Tracking at PVC
i,min
SOCBESS BESS minimum SOC
i
SOCBESS (t) BESS SOC
i,max
SOCBESS BESS maximum SOC
SOCPVCi Set PVC SOC
i
PPVC Set PVC power
i
Pcritical Critical electric load
i
Pnon −critical (t ) Non-critical load
i,max
Pnon −critical Maximum non-critical load

Abbreviations

BESS Battery Energy Storage System

BEMS Building Energy Management System
CEMS Community Energy Management System
DER Distributed Energy Resources
EMS Energy Management System
HEMS Home Energy Management System
NCLS Non-critical Load shedding
PI Proportional Integrator
PLL Phase Locked Loop
PV Photovoltaic
PVC PV Curtailment
QSG Quadrature Signature Generator
SOC State of Charge
SOGI Second Order Generalized Integrator
VSC Voltage Source Converter
Energies 2023, 16, 621 20 of 22

References
1. Elavarasan, R.M.; Shafiullah, G.; Padmanaban, S.; Kumar, N.M.; Annam, A.; Vetrichelvan, A.M.; Mihet-Popa, L.; Holm-Nielsen,
J.B. A Comprehensive Review on Renewable Energy Development, Challenges, and Policies of Leading Indian States with an
International Perspective. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 74432–74457. [CrossRef]
2. Rehman, W.U.; Bhatti, A.R.; Awan, A.B.; Sajjad, I.A.; Khan, A.A.; Bo, R.; Haroon, S.S.; Amin, S.; Tlili, I.; Oboreh-Snapps, O. The
Penetration of Renewable and Sustainable Energy in Asia: A State-of-the-Art Review on Net-Metering. IEEE Access 2020, 8,
170364–170388. [CrossRef]
3. Alharbi, F.R.; Csala, D. GCC Countries’ Renewable Energy Penetration and the Progress of Their Energy Sector Projects. IEEE
Access 2020, 8, 211986–212002. [CrossRef]
4. Xu, S.; Xue, Y.; Chang, L. Review of Power System Support Functions for Inverter-Based Distributed Energy Resources- Standards,
Control Algorithms, and Trends. IEEE Open J. Power Electron. 2021, 2, 88–105. [CrossRef]
5. Olivares, D.E.; Mehrizi-Sani, A.; Etemadi, A.H.; Cañizares, C.A.; Iravani, R.; Kazerani, M.; Hajimiragha, A.H.; Gomis-Bellmunt,
O.; Saeedifard, M.; Palma-Behnke, R.; et al. Trends in Microgrid Control. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2014, 5, 1905–1919. [CrossRef]
6. Farrokhabadi, M.; Lagos, D.; Wies, R.W.; Paolone, M.; Liserre, M.; Meegahapola, L.; Kabalan, M.; Hajimiragha, A.H.; Peralta, D.;
Elizondo, M.A.; et al. Microgrid Stability Definitions, Analysis, and Examples. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2020, 35, 13–29. [CrossRef]
7. Bahaj, A.S.; James, P.A.B. Electrical Minigrids for Development: Lessons from the Field. Proc. IEEE 2019, 107, 1967–1980.
[CrossRef]
8. Kempener, R.; Lavagne, O.; Saygin, D.; Skeer, J.; Vinci, S.; Gielen, D. Off-Grid Renewable Energy Systems: Status and Methodological
Issues; The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA): Ahbu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2015; pp. 5–10.
9. Bedawy, A.; Yorino, N.; Mahmoud, K.; Lehtonen, M. An Effective Coordination Strategy for Voltage Regulation in Distribution
System Containing High Intermittent Photovoltaic Penetrations. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 117404–117414. [CrossRef]
10. Yorino, N.; Taenaka, H.; Bedawy, A.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y. Novel Agent-Based Voltage Control Methods for PV Prosumers Using
Nodal Price. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2022, 213, 108407. [CrossRef]
11. Sasaki, Y.; Yorino, N.; Zoka, Y.; Wahyudi, F. Robust Stochastic Dynamic Load Dispatch against Uncertainties. IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid 2018, 9, 5535–5542. [CrossRef]
12. Blume, S.W. Interconnected Power Systems. Electric Power System Basics for the Nonelectrical Professional; IEEE Press: Piscataway, NJ,
USA, 2016; Volume 2, Chapter 8; pp. 165–186. [CrossRef]
13. Sasaki, Y.; Tsurumi, T.; Yorino, N.; Zoka, Y.; Beni Rehiara, A. Real-Time Dynamic Economic Load Dispatch Integrated with
Renewable Energy Curtailment. J. Int. Counc. Electr. Eng. 2019, 9, 85–92. [CrossRef]
14. Afzal, S.; Mokhlis, H.; Azil Lllias, H.; Nadzirah Mansor, N.; Shareef, H. State-of-the-Art Review on Power System Resilience and
Assessment Techniques. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2020, 14, 6107–6121. [CrossRef]
15. Mohamed, M.A.; Chen, T.; Su, W.; Jin, T. Proactive Resilience of Power Systems against Natural Disasters: A Literature Review.
IEEE Access 2019, 7, 163778–163795. [CrossRef]
16. Wang, Y.; Chen, C.; Wang, J.; Baldick, R. Research on Resilience of Power Systems under Natural Disasters—A Review. IEEE
Trans. Power Syst. 2016, 31, 1604–1613. [CrossRef]
17. Abbey, C.; Cornforth, D.; Hatziargyriou, N.; Hirose, K.; Kwasinski, A.; Kyriakides, E.; Platt, G.; Reyes, L.; Suryanarayanan, S.
Powering through the Storm: Microgrids Operation for More Efficient Disaster Recovery. IEEE Power Energy Mag. 2014, 12, 67–76.
[CrossRef]
18. Hashimoto, J.; Ustun, T.S.; Suzuki, M.; Sugahara, S.; Hasegawa, M.; Otani, K. Advanced Grid Integration Test Platform for
Increased Distributed Renewable Energy Penetration in Smart Grids. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 34040–34053. [CrossRef]
19. Dragicevic, T.; Lu, X.; Vasquez, J.C.; Guerrero, J.M. DC Microgrids—Part I: A Review of Control Strategies and Stabilization
Techniques. IEEE Trans. Power Electron 2016, 31, 4876–4891. [CrossRef]
20. Dragičević, T.; Lu, X.; Vasquez, J.C.; Guerrero, J.M. DC Microgrids—Part II: A Review of Power Architectures, Applications, and
Standardization Issues. IEEE Trans. Power Electron 2016, 31, 3528–3549. [CrossRef]
21. Khodadoost Arani, A.A.; Gharehpetian, G.B.; Abedi, M. Review on Energy Storage Systems Control Methods in Microgrids. Int.
J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2019, 107, 745–757. [CrossRef]
22. Rehman, A.U.; Wadud, Z.; Elavarasan, R.M.; Hafeez, G.; Khan, I.; Shafiq, Z.; Alhelou, H.H. An Optimal Power Usage Scheduling
in Smart Grid Integrated with Renewable Energy Sources for Energy Management. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 84619–84638. [CrossRef]
23. Singaravelan, A.; Kowsalya, M.; Ram, J.P.; Gunapriya, B.; Kim, Y.J. Application of Two-Phase Simplex Method (TPSM) for an
Efficient Home Energy Management System to Reduce Peak Demand and Consumer Consumption Cost. IEEE Access 2021, 9,
63591–63601. [CrossRef]
24. Michaelson, D.; Mahmood, H.; Jiang, J. A Predictive Energy Management System Using Pre-Emptive Load Shedding for Islanded
Photovoltaic Microgrids. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2017, 64, 5440–5448. [CrossRef]
25. Dinh, H.T.; Yun, J.; Kim, D.M.; Lee, K.H.; Kim, D. A Home Energy Management System with Renewable Energy and Energy
Storage Utilizing Main Grid and Electricity Selling. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 49436–49450. [CrossRef]
26. Kumar, P.S.; Chandrasena, R.P.S.; Ramu, V.; Srinivas, G.N.; Babu, K.V.S.M. Energy Management System for Small Scale Hybrid
Wind Solar Battery Based Microgrid. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 8336–8345. [CrossRef]
27. Mathew, P.; Madichetty, S.; Mishra, S. A Multilevel Distributed Hybrid Control Scheme for Islanded DC Microgrids. IEEE Syst J
2019, 13, 4200–4207. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 621 21 of 22

28. Ortiz, L.; Orizondo, R.; Águila, A.; González, J.W.; López, G.J.; Isaac, I. Hybrid AC/DC Microgrid Test System Simulation:
Grid-Connected Mode. Heliyon 2019, 5, e02862. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29. Njoya Motapon, S.; Dessaint, L.A.; Al-Haddad, K. A Comparative Study of Energy Management Schemes for a Fuel-Cell Hybrid
Emergency Power System of More-Electric Aircraft. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2014, 61, 1320–1334. [CrossRef]
30. Albuquerque, F.L.; Moraes, A.J.; Guimarães, G.C.; Sanhueza, S.M.R.; Vaz, A.R. Photovoltaic Solar System Connected to the
Electric Power Grid Operating as Active Power Generator and Reactive Power Compensator. Sol. Energy 2010, 84, 1310–1317.
[CrossRef]
31. Aznavi, S.; Fajri, P.; Asrari, A.; Harirchi, F. Realistic and Intelligent Management of Connected Storage Devices in Future Smart
Homes Considering Energy Price Tag. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2020, 56, 1679–1689. [CrossRef]
32. Sasaki, Y.; Shimamura, Y.; Yamamoto, Y.; Zoka, Y.; Yorino, N.; Mayaguchi, N. Development of an EMS Simulator for the Purpose
of Installation of Photovoltaic Power Generation and Storage Battery in a Customer—Considering Thermal Constraints of Storage
Battery. Trans. Inst. Electr. Install. Eng. Jpn. 2019, 39, 41–49. [CrossRef]
33. Yorino, N.; Sekizaki, S.; Adachi, K.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y.; Bedawy, A.; Shimizu, T.; Amimoto, K. A Novel Design of Single-Phase
Microgrid Based on Non-Interference Core Synchronous Inverters for Power System Stabilization. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib.
2022, 1–15. [CrossRef]
34. Ciobotaru, M.; Teodorescu, R.; Blaabjerg, F. A New Single-Phase PLL Structure Based on Second Order Generalized Integrator. In
Proceedings of the 2006 37th IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, Jeju, Korea, 18–22 June 2006. [CrossRef]
35. Yang, Y.; Hadjidemetriou, L.; Blaabjerg, F.; Kyriakides, E. Benchmarking of Phase Locked Loop Based Synchronization Techniques
for Grid-Connected Inverter Systems. In Proceedings of the 2015 9th International Conference on Power Electronics and ECCE
Asia (ICPE-ECCE Asia), Seoul, Korea, 1–5 June 2015; pp. 2167–2174. [CrossRef]
36. Xu, J.; Qian, H.; Hu, Y.; Bian, S.; Xie, S. Overview of SOGI-Based Single-Phase Phase-Locked Loops for Grid Synchronization
under Complex Grid Conditions. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 39275–39291. [CrossRef]
37. Basic, D. Input Current Interharmonics of Variable-Speed Drives Due to Motor Current Imbalance. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2010,
25, 2797–2806. [CrossRef]
38. Xin, Z.; Wang, X.; Qin, Z.; Lu, M.; Loh, P.C.; Blaabjerg, F. An Improved Second-Order Generalized Integrator Based Quadrature
Signal Generator. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2016, 31, 8068–8073. [CrossRef]
39. Sasaki, Y.; Ueoka, M.; Yorino, N.; Zoka, Y.; Bedawy, A.; Kihembo, M.S. Dynamic Economic Load Dispatch with Emergency
Demand Response for Microgrid System Operation. In Proceedings of the 2021 22nd International Middle East Power Systems
Conference (MEPCON), Assiut, Egypt, 14–16 December 2021; pp. 497–502. [CrossRef]
40. Mumbere, K.S.; Sasaki, Y.; Yorino, N.; Zoka, Y.; Bedawy, A.; Tanioka, Y. An Interconnected Prosumer Energy Management System
Model for Improved Outage Resilience. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE PES/IAS PowerAfrica, Kigali, Rwanda, 22–26 August
2022. [CrossRef]
41. Samuel, M.K.; Fukuhara, A.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y.; Yorino, N.; Tanioka, Y. A Novel Energy Management Approach to Networked
Microgrids for Disaster Resilience. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Symposium on Devices, Circuits and Systems (ISDCS),
Higashihiroshima, Japan, 3–5 March 2021. [CrossRef]
42. Mumbere, S.K.; Tanioka, Y.; Matsumoto, S.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y.; Yorino, N. Distributed Control of Islanded Microgrids Based
on Battery SOC in Disaster Situations. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe
(ISGT-Europe), The Hague, The Netherlands, 26–28 October 2020; pp. 1226–1230. [CrossRef]
43. Mumbere, S.K.; Fukuhara, A.; Sasaki, Y.; Bedawy, A.; Zoka, Y.; Yorino, N. Development of An Energy Management System Tool
for Disaster Resilience in Islanded Microgrid Networks. In Proceedings of the ISCIT 2021: 2021 20th International Symposium on
Communications and Information Technologies: Quest for Quality of Life and Smart City, Tottori, Japan, 19–22 October 2021; pp.
97–100. [CrossRef]
44. Mumbere, K.S.; Sasaki, Y.; Yorino, N.; Fukuhara, A.; Zoka, Y.; Bedawy, A.; Tanioka, Y. Prosumer Control Strategy for A Robust
Microgrid Energy Management System. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe: Smart
Grids: Toward a Carbon-Free Future, ISGT Europe, Espoo, Finland, 18–21 October 2021. [CrossRef]
45. Mumbere, S.K.; Tanioka, Y.; Matsumoto, S.; Fukuhara, A.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y.; Yorino, N. A Novel Energy Management Technique
for Shared Solar and Storage Resources in Remote Communities. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE PES/IAS PowerAfrica, Nairobi,
Kenya, 25–28 August 2020. [CrossRef]
46. Mumbere, S.K.; Matsumoto, S.; Fukuhara, A.; Bedawy, A.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y.; Yorino, N.; Tanioka, Y. An Energy Management
System for Disaster Resilience in Islanded Microgrid Networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE PES/IAS PowerAfrica, Nairobi,
Kenya, 23–27 August 2021. [CrossRef]
47. Tanioka, Y.; Sasaki, Y.; Mastumoto, S.; Mumbere, K.S.; Fukuhara, A.; Sekizaki, S.; Yorino, naoto; Zoka, Y. A Study on Power
Sharing Control Considering State of Charge of Prosumers Batteries in Local Community. Trans. Inst. Electr. Install. Eng. Jpn.
2021, 41, 19–28. [CrossRef]
48. Teodorescu, R.; Liserre, M.; Rodríguez, P. Grid Synchronization in Single-Phase Power Converters. Grid Convert. Photovolt. Wind
Power Syst. 2010, 29, 43–91. [CrossRef]
49. Sasaki, Y.; Enomoto, S.; Yorino, N.; Zoka, Y.; Kihembo, M.S. Solar Power Prediction Using Iterative Network Pruning Technique
for Microgrid Operation. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies-Asia (ISGT Asia), Brisbane,
Australia, 5–8 December 2021. [CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 621 22 of 22

50. Rehiara, A.B.; Yorino, N.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y. A Novel Adaptive LFC Based on MPC Method. IEEJ Trans. Electr. Electron. Eng.
2019, 14, 1145–1152. [CrossRef]
51. Wang, W.; Yorino, N.; Sasaki, Y.; Zoka, Y.; Bedawy, A.; Kawauchi, S. A Novel Adaptive Model Predictive Frequency Control
Using Unscented Kalman Filter. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2022, 213, 108721. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.