energies

Article
Voltage Control Strategy for Energy Storage System in
Sustainable Distribution System Operation
Yue Zhang 1,† and Anurag Srivastava 2, *,†

1 General Electric, Bothell, WA 98011, USA; zzyt1998@gmail.com

2 The School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Washington State University,
Pullman, WA 99164, USA
* Correspondence: anurag.k.srivastava@wsu.edu
† Current address: School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Washington State University,
Pullman, WA 99164, USA.

Abstract: Due to the increasing penetration of distributed energy resources (DERs) required for
the sustainable distribution system, new voltage control strategy is needed by utilities. Traditional
voltage control strategy can not support the increasing number of DERs in a coordinated and
scalable manner to meet the operational voltage regulation requirement. Supported by the power
electronics converter, the energy storage system can provide fast, smooth, and flexible voltage control
services. In this paper, an effective and easy to implement sensitivity-based voltage control strategy
is developed for the energy storage system. The developed control strategy is validated using an
industrial feeder data in Northwest Washington. The proposed strategy can mitigate the voltage
unbalance issue, improve the voltage profile, and correct power factors while supporting sustainable
distribution system operation.



Keywords: voltage control; smart distribution system; energy storage system; DERs; storage man-


agement
Citation: Zhang, Y.; Srivastava, A.
Voltage Control Strategy for Energy
Storage System in Sustainable
Distribution System Operation. 1. Introduction
Energies 2021, 14, 832. https://
Many conventional generators are approaching their lifespan and are planned to be
doi.org/10.3390/en14040832
replaced by renewable energy given the push for sustainable power systems. Around
Academic Editors: João Soares, Bruno
2000 MW of conventional generators will be retired in the Washington and Oregon states
Canizes and Zita Vale
[1] by end of 2020 and are being replaced by renewable and distributed energy resources
Received: 27 December 2020 (DERs) like photo-voltaic (PV) and wind turbines [2]. Enhanced integration of DERs
Accepted: 28 January 2021 could significantly impact the system voltage profile and the operations of the voltage
Published: 5 February 2021 regulation devices [3]. Variation in energy output may also increase the voltage unbalance
rate of the system [4]. The voltage unbalance rate in the distribution system is usually
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu- larger than that in the transmission system due to the unbalanced network configuration.
tral with regard to jurisdictional clai- Imbalance voltages may damage equipment like induction motors [5], lead to an even
ms in published maps and institutio- higher unbalanced phase current [6] and introduce more losses and heating effects [7].
nal affiliations. Therefore, maintaining a low voltage unbalance rate could help to improve the power
quality and increase the reliability of the distribution system.
Traditionally, devices like regulators or capacitors are utilized to do Volt/Var control
in the distribution system. Authors in [8] propose a multi-objective Volt/Var control
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Li-
method to optimize the operation of capacitor banks and tap changing transformers in
censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
the distribution network. In [9], an integrated voltage control method is introduced to
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and con-
minimize energy losses with capacitors and regulators. Using data from measurement
ditions of the Creative Commons At-
and communication infrastructure, the control scheme shows good coordination among
tribution (CC BY) license (https:// voltage regulators and capacitor banks and thus provides an effective Volt/Var control.
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ Another strategy that aims to control capacitors through communication among remote
4.0/). terminal units is presented in [10]. An online Volt/Var optimization application that runs

Energies 2021, 14, 832. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14040832 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2021, 14, 832 2 of 12

at the utility control center is described in [11]. Authors in [12] develop a voltage control
method to minimize the line losses by adjusting the transformer tap position. An intelligent
voltage control algorithm to maximize total energy savings in the distribution system is
discussed in [13]. In [14], wireless distributed processing units are utilized to control the
voltage control devices through performing power flow analysis. Authors in [15] propose
a hybrid genetic-fuzzy algorithm to control the voltage profile, reactive power flow, and
total harmonic distortion.
Since frequently switching these traditional voltage control devices will shorten their
lifespan [16], there is a need for fast response and flexible operation devices. Supported
by the power electronics-based four-quadrant operation, the energy storage system (ESS)
becomes a promising option and could provide active and reactive support to the grid [17,18].
ESS is usually used to provide active power support like load shedding and peak shaving.
An ESS-based active power management scheme is proposed for PV capacity firming
and energy time shift in [19]. The authors in [20] utilize a multi-agent ESS frequency
schedule to regulate the active power. Another fuzzy active power control method is
introduced for ESS to reduce the operating cost and power exchange. Due to the relatively
high installation cost of ESS, utility companies show growing interest in investigating the
potential benefits of ESS in addition to the active power support. For example, ESS is
mainly used to manage the adjacent PV station in Marshall Steam Station Energy Storage
Project. However, Duke Energy uses ESS to provide both active and reactive power support,
such as peak shaving, energy time-shift, capacity firming, and voltage control [21]. In the
research field, researchers are also investigating how to design a control strategy that can
utilize ESS’ reactive power capacity on top of real power capacity. For example, Kashem
and Ledwich design a P-I controller for ESS for real and reactive power support [22].
Under the Q mode, ESS can inject reactive power from the converter for low voltage
correction. Similar to other P-I controllers, it may suffer from high starting overshoot and
sensitive to controller gains [23]. In [24], an optimization-based ESS control strategy is
proposed to ensure the voltage quality requirements in an low voltage grid with high PV
penetration. This strategy requires frequently power flow solutions to get the voltage value
from critical nodes. Similarly, authors in [25] propose an ESS control strategy in middle
voltage level distribution systems to provide peak load shaving and voltage support. This
method takes into account power flow, bus voltage, and associated ESS control parameters.
Notice that the above optimization-based ESS control strategy usually need a continuous
power flow solution to control the reactive power output. For a relatively large industrial
distribution system, an accurate and high-frequency power flow solution is not always
available. Besides, the voltage unbalance issue is not fully investigated with ESS control.
In the eastern Washington area, Avista deployed an ESS to provide a continuous
power supply to a local manufacturer customer for enhanced reliability. Avista is also
interested to use ESS to provide frequency regulation and voltage control services [26]. The
modeling of the feeder with this ESS is done in [27], and the ESS real power control strategy
for frequency support is provided in [26]. The local ESS reactive power control strategy is
developed in [28]. In addition to our previous work in [28], a sensitivity-based coordinated
voltage control strategy is developed for ESS to mitigate the voltage regulation issues along
the feeder and help to reduce voltage unbalance rate under varying load conditions and
varying installed PV capacity. The contributions of this paper are summarized as follows:
(1) Comparing to our previous work in [28], the proposed strategy can further reduce
voltage unbalance rate under varying conditions. (2) Comparing to optimization-based
control strategies, the proposed strategy does not require regular distribution power flow
solutions results to control the reactive power output. (3) The simulation results are tested
and validated with a real industrial feeder model and actual field data. The local utility
company can easily validate the performance of the proposed strategy with its own energy
management systems.
Energies 2021, 14, 832 3 of 12

2. Voltage Sensitivity-Based ESS Control Scheme

2.1. Voltage Control Scheme in Distribution System
Voltage control is an important distribution energy management application, which
can provide voltage support based on the measured data [29]. A typical voltage control
scheme in the distribution system is explained in Figure 1. The overall goal is to improve
voltage profile and reduce the total network losses [30,31]. The voltage control scheme
can be implemented by centralized or decentralized approaches with load tap changers,
voltage regulators, capacitor banks, and etc. Each approach includes a specific problem
algorithm to achieve the required network targets. The centralized control scheme can
achieve a theoretical global optimal object through a series of control actions. However,
this approach requires an accurate distribution model and reliable power flow and state
estimation results. The network changes will also impact the results. On the other hand, a
decentralized control scheme uses real-time local measurements to control a certain one
or a group of voltage control devices to achieve a specific objective. Although it may not
produce the "optimal" control steps like the centralized scheme, this approach is not limited
by the power flow results and can produce fast voltage support.

Figure 1. The voltage control scheme in the distribution system.

In order to enable ESS to provide support in presence of the above existing control
scheme, a new voltage control strategy for ESS is needed. Usually, utilities hesitate to do
large scale control scheme change due to large scale field testing requirement and safety
concerns, so a control strategy that can help to improve distribution system operation with
minimal coordination problem with other control devices is preferred.
To meet the need of utilities, a sensitivity based control strategy is proposed. The con-
trol scheme is presented in Figure 2. Based on the voltage sensitivity analysis method [32],
the sensitivity factor estimator will utilize the system model and smart meter data to
generate the sensitivity factor for this system. In real-time operation, the ESS controller can
control the reactive power output based on the measured voltages and the sensitivity factor.

Figure 2. The scheme of the proposed energy storage system (ESS) control strategy.
Energies 2021, 14, 832 4 of 12

2.2. Sensitivity Factor Estimator

The sensitive factor estimator will generate the sensitivity factor through off-line
simulation. To get the sensitivity factor of the studied system, the general power flow
equations are introduced first:

N
Pk = ∑ |Vk ||Vn ||Ykn | cos(θkn + δn – δk ) (1)
n=1
N
Qk = ∑ |Vk ||Vn ||Ykn | sin(θkn + δn – δk ) (2)
n=1

where Pk and Qk represent the injected active and reactive powers at node k; Vk and Vn
represent the voltage magnitude for node k and n. δk , δn represent the voltage angle at
nodes k and n. Ykn ∠θkn is the admittance between nodes k and n. For a given nominal
operation point, the above equations can be linearized as:

 
∂P ∂P
    
ΔP  ∂δ ∂V  Δδ
= · (3)

ΔQ  ∂Q ∂Q  ΔV
∂δ ∂V
The inverse of the Jacobian matrix is the sensitivity matrix. Sδp , Sδq , Svp , Svq describe
the relationship between the voltage angle, magnitude and the active, reactive power.

     
Δδ S Sδq ΔP
= δp · (4)
ΔV Svp Svq ΔQ

For a given operational point, the voltage change for each node can be calculated with
changed reactive power. Assuming the ESS is installed at node k. If the reactive power
output of ESS is changed by ΔQB , the voltage changes (ΔVi ) at node i can be calculated as:

ΔVi = Svq (i, k) · ΔQB (5)

Since the focus of this study is Volt/Var control strategy, the real power control is
not included here. The ESS real power output ΔPB is zero and Svp (i, k) is neglected.
The sensitivity factor is defined as the inverse of Svq (i, k).

1
k= (6)
Svq (i, k)

Noticing that for any i 6= k, Svq (i, k) ≤ Svq (k, k), so the reactive output of the ESS has
the highest effectiveness on the installed node [33].
The sensitivity factor can be calculated through two off-line simulations using the
feeder model and collected field data. In each case, ESS will provide a constant reactive
power output during the entire period, namely QB1 and QB2 . The output difference should
be small and meet the linear approximation criteria. The sensitivity factor for each snapshot
kt can be calculated.

ΔQB QB2 – QB1

kt = = (7)
ΔVB VB2 – VB1
Energies 2021, 14, 832 5 of 12

where VB1 and VB2 is the average voltage measured at the ESS terminal from the above
two scenarios. Depending on the simulation time interval (ΔT) and total simulation time
T, there will be N = T/ΔT sensitivity factors generated from the simulation. Finally, we get
the average sensitivity factor K from averaging them using Equation (8).

1 N
K= ∑ kt
N t=1
(8)

2.3. ESS Controller

The ESS controller will control the reactive power output for each phase based on the
calculated sensitivity factor from the sensitive factor estimator and the measured voltage
value at the ESS terminal. In order to change the voltage to the desired target voltage (VT )
from the current measured voltage (VB ), the total required reactive power QB is determined
by Equation (9), whereas, QB should vary within the reactive power output limits (Qmin
and Qmax ).

QB = K · (VT – VB ) (9)
Qmin ≤ QB ≤ Qmax (10)

Once the total required reactive power is determined, it will be allocated to each phase
properly to mitigate the voltage unbalance issue. The reactive power for each phase is
calculated using Equation (11).

p
p (VT – VB )
QB = p × QB (11)
∑p (VT – VB )
p p
where QB is reactive compensation needed for each phase p from ESS and VB is the
measured phase voltage at the ESS node. The voltage sensitivity analysis method is
initially derived for the transmission system. To validate the proposed method for the
distribution system which normally has an unbalanced charter and has a relatively lower
X/R ratio [34,35], a detailed feeder model is needed. For our feeder model, each phase is
explicitly modeled. The electromagnetic coupling between phases is also included. The
resistance and reactance of each component are considered as well. Applying the sensitivity
analysis method on this detailed distribution model, we demonstrate that the measured
average voltage at ESS bus with the proposed strategy is very close to the pre-set target
voltage, which proves the feasibility of this method.

3. Simulation Results and Analysis

In this section, several simulation cases have been conducted to present the benefits of
the proposed control strategy.

3.1. Simulation Environment and Evaluation Metrics

The simulation system is developed based on an actual feeder in Pullman with gridlab-
D. The configuration of the feeder is presented in Figure 3. This system has over 300 nodes
and the load data is collected from smart meters. The studied 1.31 MVA/ 3.2 MWh ESS has
65–70% AC round trip efficiency. The ESS inverter has 5s charge/discharge lock time and
97.5% efficiency. The model detail and model validation process is present in our previous
work in [27,28].
Energies 2021, 14, 832 6 of 12

Figure 3. The configuration of the modeled industrial feeder.

In this paper, two metrics are utilized to quantify the impact of ESS on voltage
unbalance mitigation and voltage profile improvement. The phase voltage unbalance rate
(PVUR) defined by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) [4] is used to
evaluate the voltage unbalance rate. The PVUR is defined as [36]:

VD
PVUR = × 100% (12)
VA

where VD represent the max voltage deviation from the average phase voltage and VA
is the average phase voltage. For the voltage drop improvement, we evaluate the mean
voltage magnitude changes at the feeder end using Equation (13).

Vwo – Vw
IMP = × 100% (13)
Vwo

where Vw and Vwo is the mean voltage with/without the proposed method.

3.2. Simulation Results for One Specific Day

The performance of the three-phase Volt/Var control strategy is tested on a typical
winter day on 16 January 2017. The voltage profile along the feeder without ESS at 18:00
is shown in Figure 4a. Since Feeder I is a relatively short feeder, the voltage drop along
the feeder is relatively small. However, due to the nature unbalanced characteristics of the
distribution system, the voltage unbalance rate is noticeable and gets worse at the feeder
end. Based on the measured voltage at the ESS node, ESS will inject reactive power to the
feeder as shown in Figure 4b. According to the control algorithm, the lower the measured
phase voltage, the higher the injected reactive power. ESS will inject more reactive power
to phase B and C at 18:00. As a result, the average voltage drop improvement is 30.9%,
and the maximum voltage unbalance rate in terms of PVUR can decrease from 0.2415% to
0.1225%.
Energies 2021, 14, 832 7 of 12

Voltage profile along the feeder at 18:00

1

Battery reactive power output(kVAR)

450

400
Voltage magnitude (pu)

0.995

350

0.99 300

250

0.985 200
Phase A
Phase A (w/o BES Q output) 150 Phase B
Phase B(w/o BES Q output)
Phase C
0.98 Phase C(w/o BES Q output) 100

substation node lowest voltage node 0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00

(a) Voltage profile without ESS (b) Reactive power output from ESS
Figure 4. Simulation results on 16 January 2017.

3.3. PVUR Mitigation

The proposed ESS control strategy can help to mitigate high voltage unbalance rate
along the feeder and quantified in terms of PVUR improvement. The original PVUR for
each three-phase node without ESS on 16 January is plotted in Figure 5a. Due to the
physical structure of the feeder, the node at the feeder end tends to have a higher PVUR.
However, the highest PVUR rate is not always at the feeder end. PVUR is also varying
with time, usually higher PVUR is during morning and night peak time. Typically, less
than 1% PVUR is recommended [37] and the feeder is operated within the range. With the
help of ESS, the PVUR can be future reduced to improve the power quality. The PVUR
for each three-phase node with ESS on the same day is plotted in Figure 5b. Compared
with feeder without ESS, the PVUR is decreased significantly, especially during peak hours.
The average PVUR decreases from 0.074% to 0.053% and the maximum PVUR decrease
from 0.241% to 0.160%. The PVUR for all testing days are listed in Table 1. For all testing
days, the PVUR improvement ranges from 9.65% to 43.84%.

Feeder Feeder
0.2 0.2
End End
0.18 0.18

0.16 0.16

0.14 0.14

0.12 0.12

0.1 0.1

0.08 0.08

0.06 0.06

0.04 0.04

0.02 0.02

Feeder Feeder
0 0
Head 0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00 Head 0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00

(a) PVUR profilo without ESS control (b) PVUR profilo with ESS control
Figure 5. Phase voltage unbalance rate (PVUR) for each three-phase node on 16 January 2017.
Energies 2021, 14, 832 8 of 12

Table 1. Maximum PVUR improvement from ESS controller.

Season Data No ESS With ESS Improvement

22 August 2016 0.22% 0.19% 13.07%
23 August 2016 0.20% 0.18% 12.82%
Summer
24 August 2016 0.20% 0.18% 9.93%
25 August 2016 0.20% 0.18% 9.65%
12 October 2016 0.23% 0.19% 19.18%
13 October 2016 0.28% 0.21% 24.72%
Autumn
14 October 2016 0.21% 0.17% 18.59%
15 October 2016 0.27% 0.21% 21.90%
12 January 2017 0.25% 0.18% 30.47%
13 January 2017 0.24% 0.14% 43.84%
Winter 14 January 2017 0.23% 0.15% 34.21%
15 January 2017 0.22% 0.14% 35.80%
16 January 2017 0.24% 0.16% 33.70%

3.4. Power Factor Correction and Voltage Profile Improvement

Power factor correction is another benefit of the ESS controller. The improvement for
one simulation case on 15 October is plotted in Figure 6a. The improvement is relatively low
in the morning and high during the rest of the time. For days with higher reactive power
demand like this testing day, ESS can help to improve the power factor from 0.93 to 0.956.
Mininum power factor correction for all testing days is presented in Figure 6b. For different
loading conditions, all testing days show power factor improvement from ESS.

0.98

0.96
Power factor

0.94

0.92

Without ESS
With ESS
0.9

0.88
0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00
Time

(a) Power factor improvement on 15 October (b) Mininum power factor correction for all testing days
Figure 6. Power factor correction results.

ESS could also help to improve voltage profile through increasing the voltage mag-
nitude along the feeder for all three phases. The power loss and transferring capacity
can benefit from such improvement. The voltage profile with and without the proposed
control strategy on 14 January is presented in Figure 7a. Under different load conditions,
the improvement varies from 2.2% to 38.1%, but the average improvement is about 30% as
shown in Figure 7b.
Energies 2021, 14, 832 9 of 12

(a) Voltage profile improvement on 14 January (b) Voltage profile improvement for all testing days
Figure 7. Voltage profile improvement results.

3.5. Control Strategy Comparison

Compared to the original ESS control strategy proposed in [28], named as Strategy I,
the new strategy, named as Strategy II, can provide a better voltage unbalance rate mitiga-
tion and a similar level of voltage profile improvement at the same time. The maximum
PVUR for all nodes on 16 January 2017 is plotted in Figure 8. Visually, Strategy II is more
efficient in voltage unbalance rate mitigation during the entire testing day. Strategy I is not
designed for PVUR mitigation and ESS will inject reactive power equally to each phase, so
the PVUR rate is only slightly better than the benchmark case without ESS. In comparison,
the new control strategy II will provide a different level of reactive power compensation
at each phase based on the measured voltage. As a result, PVUR can be further reduced.
Especially, during the morning and night peak period, strategy II can help to reduce the
PVUR much higher than strategy I.

Without ESS
Strategy I
0.2 Strategy II
PVUR(%)

0.15

0.1

0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00

Figure 8. Maximum PVUR comparison between control strategies I and II.

3.6. Impact of PV on PVUR

Deeper PV penetration could cause the voltage unbalance issues. For example, when
the PV size increases to 750 kVA, the PVUR increases significantly during noontime as
shown in Figure 9a. Originally, the maximum PVUR is 0.241% and happened at 20:00.
Due to the effect of PV, the maximum PVUR is 0.359% and happened at 13:00. PV generators
not only increase the overall PVUR along the feeder but also creates new peak PVUR hours
during the noontime. For the current penetration level, a 75 kVA PV has a limited impact
on PVUR. However, when the penetration level reaches 750 kVA, the impact will become
quite obvious. To test the influence of high-level PV penetration on the voltage control
strategy, one test case is conducted on 16 January with a 750 kVA PV system. The new
PVUR profile for this feeder is plotted in Figure 9b. Compared with the system without
Energies 2021, 14, 832 10 of 12

ESS control, the maximum PVUR decreases from 0.359% to 0.175%. The noon PVUR peak
caused by PV is almost fully mitigated.

Feeder
0.3 Feeder
End 0.3
End

0.25 0.25

0.2 0.2

0.15 0.15

0.1 0.1

0.05
0.05

Feeder
Feeder 0
0 Head0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00
Head0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 24:00

(b) PVUR profile with ESS control

(a) PVUR profile without ESS control
Figure 9. PVUR mitigation under high photo-voltaic (PV) penetration scenario.

3.7. The Impact of Load Level on Voltage Control Performance

Since there is a certain reactive power output limit for the ESS, it may not increase the
voltage as desired under heavy load conditions. As shown in Figure 10a, the demand on
12 January is significantly higher than that on 14 January. During the test, the reactive output
from ESS on 12 January capped at 1.2 MVar after 6:00 am as shown in Figure 10b. Therefore,
it is beneficial to find a suitable size of ESS for a certain feeder through simulation.

(a) Real and reactive power demand (b) The reactive power output of ESS
Figure 10. The impact of load level on voltage control performance.

4. Conclusions
This paper proposes a sensitivity-based voltage control strategy for the real-time oper-
ation of sustainable distribution systems with a high DER penetration rate. The proposed
method utilizes only measured voltage at the ESS terminal to determine the reactive power
output for each phase, which can reduce voltage unbalance rate under varying conditions
on top of voltage profile improvement and power factor correction. Under a high DERs
penetration case, the maximum PVUR is reduced significantly. The new PVUR peak dur-
Energies 2021, 14, 832 11 of 12

ing noon-time caused by PVs is properly mitigated. The developed technique has been
validated using a detailed feeder model based on real field data. The utility company can
easily validate the proposed strategy with its energy management systems. Future work
includes extending the proposed algorithm for the four-quadrant operation of converters
and coordination with distributed energy resources such as PV and wind.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Y.Z. and A.S.; methodology, Y.Z. and A.S.; software,
Y.Z. and A.S.; validation, Y.Z. and A.S.; formal analysis, Y.Z. and A.S.; investigation, Y.Z. and A.S.;
resources, Y.Z. and A.S.; data curation, Y.Z. and A.S.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.Z.;
writing—review and editing, Y.Z. and A.S.; visualization, Y.Z. and A.S.; supervision, A.S.; project
administration, A.S.; funding acquisition, A.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable .
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable .
Data Availability Statement: 3rd Party Data Restrictions apply to the availability of these data. Data
was obtained from [Avista Utilities] and are available [from the authors] with the permission of
[Avista].
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the Avista Utilities, the Pacific Northwest
National Lab (PNNL) and US Department of Energy for the financial support and providing industrial
data to conduct this work. We would like to acknowledge support from Chen-Ching Liu, Yin Xu,
and Venkatesh Venkataramanan for supporting part of this work.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Balducci, P.J.; Jin, C.; Wu, D.; Kintner-Meyer, M.; Leslie, P.; Daitch, C. Assessment of Energy Storage Alternatives in the Puget Sound
Energy System; Technical Report; Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Richland, WA, USA, 2013.
2. Mahmud, N.; Zahedi, A. Review of control strategies for voltage regulation of the smart distribution network with high
penetration of renewable distributed generation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 64, 582–595. [CrossRef]
3. Eghtedarpour, N.; Farjah, E. Distributed charge/discharge control of energy storages in a renewable-energy-based DC micro-grid.
IET Renew. Power Gener. 2014, 8, 45–57. [CrossRef]
4. Tangsunantham, N.; Pirak, C. Voltage unbalance measurement in three-phase smart meter applied to AMI systems. In
Proceedings of the 2013 10th International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and
Information Technology, Krabi, Thailand, 15–17 May 2013; pp. 1–5. [CrossRef]
5. Pillay, P.; Hofmann, P.; Manyage, M. Derating of induction motors operating with a combination of unbalanced voltages and
over or undervoltages. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2002, 17, 485–491. [CrossRef]
6. Lee, C.Y. Effects of unbalanced voltage on the operation performance of a three-phase induction motor. IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers. 1999, 14, 202–208. [CrossRef]
7. Von Jouanne, A.; Banerjee, B. Assessment of voltage unbalance. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2001, 16, 782–790. [CrossRef]
8. Niknam, T.; Zare, M.; Aghaei, J. Scenario-Based Multiobjective Volt/Var Control in Distribution Networks Including Renewable
Energy Sources. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2012, 27, 2004–2019. [CrossRef]
9. Borozan, V.; Baran, M.E.; Novosel, D. Integrated Volt/Var control in distribution systems. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Power
Engineering Society Winter Meeting, Columbus, OH, USA, 28 January–1 February 2001; Volume 3, pp. 1485–1490.
10. Homaee, O.; Zakariazadeh, A.; Jadid, S. Real-time voltage control algorithm with switched capacitors in smart distribution
system in presence of renewable generations. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2014, 54, 187–197. [CrossRef]
11. Feng, X.; Peterson, W.; Yang, F.; Wickramasekara, G.M.; Finney, J. Implementation of control center based voltage and var
optimization in distribution management system. In Proceedings of the IEEE PES Transmission and Distribution Conference
Exposition, New Orleans, LA, USA, 19–22 April 2010; pp. 1–6.
12. Qiu, J.; Shahidehpour, S.M. A new approach for minimizing power losses and improving voltage profile. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
1987, 2, 287–295. [CrossRef]
13. Anilkumar, R.; Devriese, G.; Srivastava, A.K. Voltage and Reactive Power Control to Maximize the Energy Savings in Power
Distribution System With Wind Energy. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2018, 54, 656–664. [CrossRef]
14. Ibrahim, M.; Salama, M.M.A. Smart distribution system volt/VAR control using distributed intelligence and wireless communi-
cation. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2015, 9, 307–318. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 832 12 of 12

15. Ulinuha, A.; Masoum, M.A.S.; Islam, S. Hybrid genetic-fuzzy algorithm for volt/var/total harmonic distortion control of
distribution systems with high penetration of non-linear loads. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2011, 5, 425–439. [CrossRef]
16. Elkhatib, M.E.; Shatshat, R.E.; Salama, M.M.A. Optimal Control of Voltage Regulators for Multiple Feeders. IEEE Trans. Power
Deliv. 2010, 25, 2670–2675. [CrossRef]
17. Zhang, Y.; Li, J.; Meng, K.; Dong, Z.Y.; Yu, Z.; Wong, K.P. Voltage regulation in distribution network using battery storage units via
distributed optimization. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Power System Technology, Wollongong,
Australia, 28 September–1 October 2016; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
18. Quoc Hung, D.; Mishra, Y. Voltage fluctuation mitigation: fast allocation and daily local control of DSTATCOMs to increase solar
energy harvest. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2019, 13, 2558–2568. [CrossRef]
19. Abdelrazek, S.A.; Kamalasadan, S. Integrated PV Capacity Firming and Energy Time Shift Battery Energy Storage Management
Using Energy-Oriented Optimization. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016, 52, 2607–2617. [CrossRef]
20. Li, C.; Coelho, E.A.A.; Dragicevic, T.; Guerrero, J.M.; Vasquez, J.C. Multiagent-Based Distributed State of Charge Balancing
Control for Distributed Energy Storage Units in AC Microgrids. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2017, 53, 2369–2381. [CrossRef]
21. Infante, L.; Chistyakova, O. Leading the Way: U.S. Electric Company Investment and Innovation in Energy Storage; Technical Report;
Edison Electric Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2018.
22. Kashem, M.; Ledwich, G. Energy requirement for distributed energy resources with battery energy storage for voltage support in
three-phase distribution lines. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2007, 77, 10 – 23. [CrossRef]
23. Sreekumar, T.; Jiji, K.S. Comparison of Proportional-Integral (P-I) and Integral-Proportional (I-P) controllers for speed control
in vector controlled induction Motor drive. In Proceedings of the 2012 2nd International Conference on Power, Control and
Embedded Systems, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, India, 17–19 December 2012; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
24. Marra, F.; Fawzy, Y.T.; Bülo, T.; Blažic, B. Energy storage options for voltage support in low-voltage grids with high penetration
of photovoltaic. In Proceedings of the 2012 3rd IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe, Berlin, Germany, 14–17
October 2012; pp. 1–7. [CrossRef]
25. Wang, J.; Hashemi, S.; You, S.; Trœholt, C. Active and reactive power support of MV distribution systems using battery energy
storage. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, Toronto, ON, Canada, 22–25 March
2017; pp. 382–387. [CrossRef]
26. Alam, M.J.E.; Balducci, P.J.; Hardy, T.D.; Bose, A.; Liu, C.C.; Srivastava, A.K.; Xu, Y.; Morrell, T.J.; Venkatramanan, V.; Zhang, Y.; et
al. Development and Analysis of Control Strategies for a 1 MW/3.2 MWh Energy Storage System at Avista Utilities; Technical Report;
Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL): Richland, WA, USA, 2020.
27. Morrell, T.J.; Venkataramanan, V.; Srivastava, A.; Bose, A.; Liu, C. Modeling of Electric Distribution Feeder Using Smart Meter
Data. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition (T&D), Denver, CO, USA,
16–19 April 2018; pp. 1–9. [CrossRef]
28. Zhang, Y.; Xu, Y.; Srivastava, A.K.; Liu, C.C. Voltage control strategy in distribution system with energy storage and distributed
generations. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, Cincinnati, OH, USA, 1–5 October
2017; pp. 1–8. [CrossRef]
29. Chanda, S.; Shariatzadeh, F.; Srivastava, A.; Lee, E.; Stone, W.; Ham, J. Implementation of non-intrusive energy saving estimation
for Volt/VAr control of smart distribution system. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2015, 120, 39–46. [CrossRef]
30. Saiz-Marin, E.; Lobato, E.; Egido, I. Optimal voltage control by wind farms using data mining techniques. IET Renew. Power
Gener. 2014, 8, 141–150. [CrossRef]
31. Guo, Y.; Gao, H.; Wu, Q.; Zhao, H.; Østergaard, J. Coordinated voltage control scheme for VSC-HVDC connected wind power
plants. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2018, 12, 198–206. [CrossRef]
32. Aghatehrani, R.; Kavasseri, R. Sensitivity-analysis-based sliding mode control for voltage regulation in microgrids. IEEE Trans.
Sustain. Energy 2013, 4, 50–57. [CrossRef]
33. Liu, C.C.; Tomsovic, K. An expert system assisting decision-making of reactive power/voltage control. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
1986, 1, 195–201. [CrossRef]
34. Corsi, S. Voltage Control and Protection in Electrical Power Systems: From System Components to Wide-Area Control; Springer: London,
UK, 2015.
35. Eremia, M.; Shahidehpour, M. Handbook of Electrical Power System Dynamics: Modeling, Stability, and Control; John Wiley & Sons:
Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013; Volume 92.
36. IEEE. IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction Motors and Generators; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2004.
37. Advanced Manufacturing Office. Energy Tips: Motor Systems; Technical Report; U.S. Department of Energy: Washington, DC,
USA, 2012.