IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO.

2, APRIL 2022 1021

Generalized Virtual Synchronous Generator Control

Design for Renewable Power Systems
Dayan B. Rathnayake , Student Member, IEEE, Reza Razzaghi , Senior Member, IEEE,
and Behrooz Bahrani , Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract—Grid-forming inverters (GFMIs) are recognized as the power reference commands received from the automatic
one of the key enablers towards highly renewable energy prolifer- generation controller (AGC) quickly and accurately. On the
ated grids. One of the pivotal characteristicsof GFMIs is the ability other hand, in the SA mode, GFMIs must provide virtual inertia
to seamlessly switch between grid-connected (GC) and standalone
(SA) modes. In this paper, a novel controller is proposed to accu- to slow down the rate of change of frequency (RoCoF) following
rately follow the power reference commands in the GC mode while a disturbance. Therefore, a novel controller is proposed in this
providing the required amount of virtual inertia in the SA mode paper for the active power controller (APC) in GFMIs to perform
to slow down the rate of change of frequency (RoCoF) following a well in both GC and SA modes.
disturbance. The proposed control design, where straightforward One of the first control structures proposed for GFMIs is droop
equations are given to calculate the controller gains directly, is
based on the frequency response of the open-loop system. Fur- control [4]. Droop control is essentially a proportional controller.
thermore, based on the frequency response of the controller, a Typically, a low-pass filter is used with droop control to filter out
condition for the placement of the poles of the controller is derived the high-frequency harmonics [5]. Generally, droop controllers
to guarantee the RoCoF relay limit compliance in the SA mode. The are used in both APCs and reactive power controllers (RPCs) in
experimental results show that the proposed controller results in GFMIs. However, the relationships between active power (P ),
lower overshoots and shorter settling times in step responses in the
GC mode than the virtual synchronous generator (VSG) controller reactive power (Q), frequency (ω), and the point of common
while providing more virtual inertia than the VSG controller to coupling (PCC) voltage magnitude (|vc |) depend on the X/R ratio
slow down RoCoF in the SA mode. Furthermore, the experimental of the grid impedance. If the grid impedance is predominately
results illustrate that the proposed controller can also be designed inductive, e.g., high-voltage transmission networks, P − ω and
to support the grid during frequency transients. The performance Q − |vc | droop relationships are used [6]. Alternatively, a virtual
of the controller is extensively validated experimentally during GC
to SA mode transition and vice versa, in a multi-inverter network, impedance loop is proposed in [7] to increase the inductive
and in a wide-area model. nature of the grid impedance. Thereby, the coupling between
active power and reactive power is minimized. Using a virtual
Index Terms—Grid-connected inverter, grid-forming inverter,
rate of change of frequency (RoCoF), renewable energy, virtual
impedance loop enables the use of P − ω and Q − |vc | droop
synchronous generator (VSG) control. relationships even in predominately resistive grids.
One of the critical drawbacks of droop control is the lack
of virtual inertia provision. Therefore, RoCoF in the SA mode
I. INTRODUCTION following a load disturbance becomes extremely high with

I NVERTER-BASED resources (IBRs) are increasingly droop control. Hence, synchronous machine emulation control
displacing fossil-fuel-based synchronous power plants to techniques are developed to overcome the issues related to low
decarbonize the power grid [1]. The majority of currently op- inertia. To this end, various control methodologies that are
erational IBRs are grid-following inverters (GFLIs). However, based on synchronous machines such as virtual synchronous
grid-forming inverters (GFMIs) are becoming increasingly pop- machine (VISMA) [8], virtual synchronous generator [9], Syn-
ular due to their superior performance in weak grids and the chronverter [10], and power synchronization control (PSC) [11]
capability to operate in the standalone (SA) mode [2], [3]. In are proposed. The most common control technique to emulate
the grid-connected (GC) mode, GFMIs are expected to follow synchronous machines’ inertial and damping properties is the
swing equation emulation-based virtual synchronous generator
Manuscript received August 16, 2021; revised December 2, 2021; accepted (VSG) control method [12].
January 2, 2022. Date of publication January 18, 2022; date of current version The VSG control topology is improved in many papers to
March 22, 2022. This work was supported in part by the Monash Grid Innovation achieve various control objectives. In [13], the authors have
Hub and in part by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) under
the Advancing Renewable Program under Grant 2020/ARP007. Paper no. TSTE- presented a proportional-integral (PI) controller-based APC that
00857-2021. (Corresponding author: Dayan B. Rathnayake.) can track power accurately even during grid frequency variations
The authors are with Electrical and Computer Systems Engineer- due to the PI-based APC’s integral action. A control method
ing, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia (e-mail: dayan.
[email protected]; [email protected]; behrooz.bahrani@mon that combines PSC and VSG control is proposed in [14], and a
ash.edu). pole/zero cancellation-based model order reduction method is
Color versions of one or more figures in this article are available at also proposed to set the desired inertia constant and a P − ω
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2022.3143664.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TSTE.2022.3143664

1949-3029 © 2022 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1022 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

droop individually. A bandpass filter-based supplementary con- jumps. In [23], an H∞ /H2 -based control design is proposed for
troller called intelligent power oscillation damper is added to GFMIs in low-medium voltage networks, although the SA mode
the basic VSG control in [15] to damp the electromechanical of operation is not considered in the control design. Therefore,
interarea power oscillations. The frequency of the interarea RoCoF following a disturbance in the SA mode could violate
electromechanical power oscillation that needs to be damped is the limits of RoCoF relays.
found based on a real-time prediction obtained from an artificial The generalized virtual synchronous generator (GVSG) con-
intelligence-based predictor utilizing the Random Forest algo- trol concept is introduced to pave the way to the main contribu-
rithm. A fuzzy-based method to dynamically adjust the inertial tion of this paper, which is the compensated GVSG (CGVSG)
response of the VSG is proposed in [16]. However, the fuzzy controller to obviate the shortcomings of the VSG controller
membership characteristics and fuzzy rules significantly affect in the GC and SA modes. Based on the frequency response
the controller’s performance as the fuzzy rules heavily depend of the controller, a condition for pole placement to guarantee
on the designer’s knowledge of the system. post-disturbance RoCoF compliance is developed. Finally, a
The main control objective of GFMIs in the GC mode is to straightforward analytical approach for designing the proposed
accurately and quickly follow the power reference commands controllers to achieve the control objectives of both GC and SA
from the AGC. On the other hand, the controllers employed in modes is proposed.
GFMIs must also provide virtual inertia to slow down RoCoF The contributions and novelties of this paper are fourfold:
following a disturbance in the SA mode. One of the shortcom- 1) A novel control structure called the GVSG control is intro-
ings of VSG control is that the tuning of parameters such as duced. Based on the GVSG, an enhanced controller called
closed-loop bandwidth and damping ratio is constrained by the the CGVSG that exhibit superior performance in both GC
droop coefficient and inertial time constant [17]–[20]. Therefore, and SA modes compared to state-of-the-art approaches is
a VSG controller designed for a high virtual inertia provision proposed.
in the SA mode could cause a large overshoot and a long 2) A condition for placement of the poles of the controllers
settling time in step response in the GC mode. In contrast, for guaranteeing RoCoF following a disturbance in the SA
the GFMI could end up causing a large RoCoF following a mode is derived.
disturbance in the SA mode if the VSG controller is designed to 3) Since only the plant gain is required for control de-
have a low overshoot and short settling time for step response sign, both parametric and experimentally identified non-
in the GC mode [19]. Consequently, a high RoCoF could be parametric models can be used.
detrimental to frequency-sensitive loads and equipment or could 4) A methodical analysis of the dynamic response of the
end up triggering RoCoF relays, paving the way for cascade GFMI with the proposed controllers based on the open-
trips. loop frequency response of the system is presented. Con-
A first-order controller such as VSG control cannot concur- sequently, a straightforward control design method to tune
rently achieve both control objectives stipulated in the GC and the controller gains is proposed.
SA modes. Therefore, in [18], a zero is added to the VSG control The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section II
to form a lead-lag controller called the synchronous power investigates the dynamic response of GFMIs with VSG control.
controller (SPC). As a result, the step response is decoupled Section III duly discusses the proposed control design process,
from the droop coefficient and inertial time constant. However, and the performance of the proposed controllers is evaluated.
this controller type results in a very high initial RoCoF level The experimental results are presented in Section IV. Finally,
in the SA mode due to its structure. A second-order controller the conclusions are drawn in Section V.
called generalized droop control is proposed in [19] to achieve
a step response with low overshoot and short settling time in
the GC mode while adhering to RoCoF relay limits in the SA
mode. However, the control design is an arduous trial and error II. DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF A GFMI WITH VSG CONTROL
process that needs to be validated through simulations. Since
the control design is not methodical, the performance of the A. Test System
controller depends heavily on the designer. The system studied in this paper is depicted in Fig. 1. A
A cross-feedforward compensation-based method is proposed GFMI with inner control loops is considered, although GFMIs
for generators with coupled P and Q loops [21] to improve can be modeled even without the inner control loops [24]. The
damping. Two cross-feedforward gains are designed to im- GFMIs with inner control loops perform better during faults
prove the damping and reduce decoupling. However, cross- over GFMIs without inner control loops as the GFMIs with inner
feedforward compensation cannot completely get rid of the control loops possess current limiting capabilities. Nevertheless,
coupling between P and Q loops. Therefore, the risk of insta- the proposed control method can be applied even for GFMIs
bility still exists. Furthermore, the impact of cross-feedforward without inner control loops. This paper’s primary focus is on the
gains on the virtual inertia provision is not considered. A phase- APC design. The voltage angle (θ) of the voltage at the PCC
amplitude cross-regulation method is proposed in [22] where (vc ) is dynamically controlled by the APC. The GFMI can be
a cross-coupling term from APC to RPC is used to improve operated in the GC mode (SA mode) by closing (opening) the
damping. However, the washout filter used in the cross-coupling SW1 switch. Furthermore, a load disturbance can be applied in
term could induce large voltage transients during frequency the SA mode by closing the SW2 switch.

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RATHNAYAKE et al.: GENERALIZED VIRTUAL SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONTROL DESIGN FOR RENEWABLE POWER SYSTEMS 1023

Fig. 1. A GFMI with internal controllers.

B. Parameter Tuning of VSG Control

The control block diagram of a VSG controller (Kvsg (s)) is
shown in Fig. 2. The structure of a VSG controller is
Dp
Kvsg (s) = , (4)
(τi s + 1)
Fig. 2. Control block diagram of the VSG controller.
where Dp and τi are the steady-state droop coefficient and the
inertial time constant. τi is equal to Jω0 Dp , where J and ω0
Considering the system shown in Fig. 1, the power injected are rotational inertia and nominal frequency, respectively. Dp
into the grid can be expressed as [25], [26], is typically defined by the grid operator based on the grid fre-
quency variation and the available power reserve. Generally, the
1 droop coefficient for synchronous generators is around 4%-5%,
P = 3 2 2
(Rg Vc2 − Rg Vc Vg cos(θ) + Xg Vc Vg sin(θ)), although for IBRs it may be lower than that to make them
Rg + Xg
technically and commercially viable [18]. For example, the
(1)
droop coefficient of the Hornsdale battery in South Australia
is equal to 1.72% [27]. During contingencies, the grid operator
where Vc and Vg are the RMS values of the capacitor voltage expects the IBRs to support the grid. The amount of support
and the grid voltage, respectively, and θ is the power angle is mandated through D . D is set such that for a predefined
p p
difference. Additionally, Rg and Xg = ωLg are the resistance frequency change in steady-state (ΔΩ), a power change equal to
and the reactance of the line impedance, respectively. Therefore, the inverter’s rating (S ) is observed. Therefore, D is defined as
n p
the small-signal model for the active power loop can be derived
as ΔΩ
Dp = . (5)
Sn
ΔP Xg Vc Vg cos(θ) + Rg Vc Vg sin(θ)
= 3 (2) τi is directly associated with the moment of inertia of the
Δθ R2g + X2g
VSG controller. Therefore, τi is set based on the virtual inertia
provision requirement. Virtual inertia provision is particularly
where “Δ” stands for the “increment operator”. In case the
important in the SA mode as RoCoF following a disturbance
line impedance is predominately reactive (which is the case in
tends to be dangerously high due to the lack of inertia. τi must
transmission networks) or if a virtual impedance loop is used in
be set according to the RoCoF withstand capability of RoCoF re-
the GFMI inner control loops, Xg is considerably larger than Rg .
lays. Otherwise, RoCoF sensitive relays could trigger or damage
Therefore, Rg is negligible. Furthermore, since the power angle
RoCoF sensitive equipment. In 50 Hz power systems, RoCoF
θ is typically small [26], sin(θ) → θ and cos(θ) → 1 are also
relay settings range from 0.5 Hz/s to 2.5 Hz/s. For example, the
valid. Finally, the parametric model for active power flow into the
typical RoCoF relay limits in some jurisdictions are as follows:
power grid over frequency (G(s)) is obtained after substituting
Ireland 1 Hz/s, Great Britain 0.5 Hz/s, Denmark 2.5 Hz/s, Spain
Δθ with Δω/s as
2 Hz/s, South Africa 1 Hz/s, Belgium 1 Hz/s [28].
The frequency trajectory following a load disturbance in the
ΔP Vg Vc 1 kg SA mode can be found by evaluating the response of
G(s) = =3 = , (3)
Δω ωLg s s
Δω −Dp
= , (6)
where kg is the plant gain, and it is equal to 3Vg Vc /ωLg . ΔP load (τ i s + 1)

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1024 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

TABLE I
PARAMETERS USED FOR THE SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENT

Fig. 3. Step response of: (a) (9) in the GC mode and (b) (6) in the SA mode.

where ΔPload is the load disturbance. Thus, RoCoF subsequent with a short circuit ratio (SCR) of 3.9 are considered in the
to a load disturbance with a VSG controller is as follows: study. During the study, Dp is set to 1% p.u., and τi is varied
−Dp from 0.5 s to 0.0455 s. As shown in Fig. 3(a), as τi is decreased,
Δω̇ = s ΔPload . (7) the overshoot and rise time are reduced. As a result, the oscil-
(τi s + 1)
lations are damped, and the step input is tracked with minimal
Therefore, a maximum upper bound for the initial RoCoF overshoot. However, as shown in Fig. 3(b), as τi is decreased,
(Δω̇|t=0+ ) for a step load disturbance of the size equal to Sn the virtual inertia provided in the SA mode is significantly
is derived by applying the initial value theorem to (7), and reduced. As a result, the initial RoCoF becomes dangerously
substituting for Dp from (5) in (7) as follows: high. Therefore, typical RoCoF relay limits could be violated,
s (−ΔΩ/Sn ) Sn and RoCoF sensitive equipment could trip. Therefore, tuning
Δω̇|t = 0+ = lim s VSG controller parameters to achieve control objectives in both
s→∞ (τi s + 1) s
GC and SA modes is challenging. To achieve both objectives in
−ΔΩ the GC and SA modes, either Dp or τi has to be compromised.
= ≥ −ρ, (8)
τi The SPC is proposed in [18] to overcome the coupling of
where ρ is the RoCoF relay limit. Therefore, the initial RoCoF droop coefficient and inertial time constant on the step response.
in the SA mode with a VSG controller conforms to ρ up to a The structure of the SPC is
disturbance size equal to Sn only if τi ≥ ΔΩ/ρ. (kp s + ki )
Kspc (s) = , (11)
(s + kj )
C. Step Response With VSG Control in GC and SA Modes
where kp , ki , and kj are set based on the required damping
The parametric transfer function of the closed-loop system ratio, bandwidth, and P − ω droop characteristic, respectively.
with a VSG controller (Gcl,vsg (s)) is Therefore, the desired bandwidth and the damping ratio of the
Dp kg /τi closed-loop system can be individually set without compromis-
Gcl,vsg (s) = . (9) ing the droop coefficient nor the inertial time constant. However,
s2 + s/τi + Dp kg /τi
the SPC results in a very high initial RoCoF following a load
This can be written in a generalized second-order transfer func- disturbance in the SA mode due to its structure. The frequency
tion format as trajectory with the SPC following a load disturbance in the SA
ωn2 mode can be found by evaluating the response of
Gcl,vsg (s) = , (10)
s2 + 2ζωn s + ωn2 Δω −(kp s + ki )
  = . (12)
where ωn = Dp kg /τi and ζ = 1/4Dp kg τi . In control ΔPload (s + kj )
theory, ωn and ζ are known as natural frequency and damping Similar to the analysis with a VSG controller, a maximum
ratio of the closed-loop system, respectively. The bandwidth upper bound for the Δω̇|t = 0+ with the SPC for a step load
and damping of the closed-loop system are directly influenced disturbance of the size equal to Sn can be derived by applying
by ωn and ζ, respectively. Consequently, Dp and τi directly the initial value theorem to (12) as follows:
affect the rise-time and the overshoot of the step response of
the system in the the GC mode. Further, as shown in (6), the
frequency variation following a disturbance in the SA mode is s (−(kp s + ki )) Sn
also influenced by Dp and τi . Δω̇|t = 0+ = lim s → ∞. (13)
s→∞ (s + kj ) s
The effect of Dp and τi on the step response of (9) in the
GC mode and (6) in the SA mode is shown in Fig. 3. The As shown in (13), Δω̇|t = 0+ with the SPC tends to be extremely
system under consideration is shown in Fig. 1, and the system high due to its biproper structure. Therefore, the GVSG is
parameters are given in Table I. The line parameters of a grid introduced in this paper to achieve accurate power reference

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RATHNAYAKE et al.: GENERALIZED VIRTUAL SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONTROL DESIGN FOR RENEWABLE POWER SYSTEMS 1025

Fig. 4. Control block diagram of the GVSG control.

tracking in the GC mode and conform to the RoCoF relay

Fig. 5. Asymptotic bode plot of the proposed controller and VSG controller
limits in the SA mode. Additionally, an enhanced controller that meets the RoCoF relay limit.
that is based on the GVSG called the CGVSG is proposed in
this paper to further improve the damping in the GC mode.
Furthermore, a straightforward control design approach based Therefore, the denominator of K(s) is simplified into two dis-
on the frequency domain analysis of the open-loop frequency tinct real poles such that the frequency trajectory in the SA mode
response is proposed to tune the controller gains. The proposed under a load disturbance has an over-damped characteristic.
control design ensures that the proposed controller achieves Therefore, the GVSG is assumed to have two distinct real poles
accurate set-point tracking with minimal overshoot and short and a zero as follows:
settling time in the GC mode while conforming to the RoCoF
Dp (αs + 1)
relay limits in the SA mode. K(s) = , (15)
(βs + 1)(γs + 1)
III. PROPOSED CONTROL DESIGN where a = α, b = βγ/(β + γ − α), and c = (β + γ − α)/Dp .
In this section, the proposed control design methodology Therefore, α, β, and γ controller gains are tuned during the
is described. First, the structure of the proposed controller is proposed control design. The proposed second-order controller
presented. Next, the RoCoF in the SA mode is guaranteed to be structure does not result in a very high initial RoCoF owing to its
less than a predetermined RoCoF relay limit by properly placing structure, and it allows setting a desired P − ω droop coefficient
the poles of the controller. Finally, the proposed control design while achieving the control objectives simultaneously. In the
is elaborated to 1) achieve fast and accurate power reference GVSG, the desired P − ω droop characteristic is set using Dp .
tracking in the GC mode and 2) provide virtual inertia and
damping in the SA mode while respecting the frequency bias B. Guaranteeing RoCoF Relay Limit Compliance
(P − ω characteristics). As shown before, a properly tuned VSG controller conforms
to the RoCoF relay limit in the SA mode. Therefore, in this
A. Structure of the Proposed Controller analysis, it is assumed that the VSG controller is tuned to
A first-order controller is not enough to achieve the control withstand a RoCoF level of ρ. RoCoF in the SA mode is directly
objectives set forth in Section II. Therefore, more poles and influenced by the high-frequency gain of Kvsg (s). Therefore, if
zeroes should be incorporated into the controller to realize the the magnitude of the frequency response of K(s) (|K(jω)|) is
control objectives. Hence, in this paper, a lead-lag controller is kept below the magnitude of the frequency response of Kvsg (s),
incorporated into the VSG control, as shown in Fig. 4. In this i.e., |Kvsg (jω)|, the high-frequency gain of |K(jω)| can be
paper, the proposed controller is referred to as the GVSG as this limited. Hence, α, β, and γ should be chosen such that |K(jω)|
structure is a generalized version of droop and VSG control. It is always maintained below |Kvsg (jω)|.
is possible to obtain the VSG control and droop control with First, to make the analysis simple, the corner frequency of the
the GVSG by explicitly selecting the controller parameters. In zero of K(s) is fixed at 1/τiρ , where τiρ = ΔΩ/ρ is the minimum
Fig. 4, Dp , a, b, c are the P − ω droop coefficient, zero and τi that can withstand a RoCoF level of ρ. Therefore,
pole of the lead-lag term, and the equivalent inertia coefficient,
α = τiρ . (16)
respectively. The VSG control is achieved through the GVSG by
setting a = b = c = τi . Furthermore, droop control is achieved Next, the poles 1/β and 1/γ are placed adjacent to 1/τiρ within
by setting τi to a low value such that the controller has a high an equal distance. The asymptotic bode magnitude plots of
bandwidth. This remark is consistent with the findings in the K(jω), Kvsg (jω), (jαω + 1), 1/(jβω + 1), and 1/(jγω + 1)
literature as the droop control is a specific version of the VSG are shown in Fig. 5. As shown in Fig. 5, such a placement of
control [29]. zeros and poles of the controller assures that |K(jω)| is always
The transfer function of the GVSG (K(s)) can be written as maintained below |Kvsg (jω)|.
Δω Dp (as + 1) As shown in Fig. 5, the points A, B, C, and D form a
K(s) = = 2
. (14) parallelogram. Therefore, geometrically, the AB and CD lengths
ΔP (Dp bcs + (a + Dp c)s + 1)
are equal. Therefore,
As shown in Fig. 3(b), the frequency trajectory in the SA mode
under a load disturbance is governed by the controller structure. AB = CD. (17)

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1026 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

is set to 0.5, and γ is incrementally varied from 0.5 to 4.25 in

steps of 0.75. The different sets of controller gains are chosen
such that (16) and (20) are satisfied. Fig. 6(a) and (b) show
the gain (|L(jω)|) and phase (φ(ω)) of L(jω), respectively,
while Fig. 6(c) illustrates the corresponding closed-loop step
responses.
It is important to note that if α = 0.5, β = 0.5, and γ = 0.5, the
controller is identical to the VSG controller as a pole cancels out
the zero of the proposed controller. Therefore, as shown in Fig. 6,
the low damping in the closed-loop step response with the VSG
controller could be attributed to the low phase margin (ϕ). This
remark is inline with control theory as the closed-loop model
with the VSG controller is a second-order transfer function.
Therefore, ϕ and ζ are correlated with each other [30]. Similarly,
Fig. 6. The frequency response of L(jω) and the corresponding closed-loop as per Fig. 6, one can attribute the overshoot and settling time
step responses. (a) gain of L(jω) (b) phase of L(jω), and (c) corresponding
step response of L(jω)/(1+L(jω)).
of the closed-loop step response with the proposed controller
to ϕ and zero-crossing frequency (ωz ), respectively, although
the closed-loop transfer function with the GVSG control is a
The points A, B, C, and D correspond to the corner frequencies third-order transfer function. This is further investigated in the
of the poles and zeros of the proposed controller. Point A cor- following.
responds to the frequency of 1/β, points B and C correspond to Upon further observation of Fig. 6(c), one can notice that as
the frequency of 1/τiρ , and point D corresponds to the frequency γ is varied, the overshoot of the closed-loop step response is
of 1/γ. Hence, the AB and CD lengths are expressed in terms reduced, and it reaches a minimum. Furthermore, the overshoot
of τiρ , β, and γ as moves away from the minimum and starts to increase again as γ
is increased. Therefore, there exists a value for γ for which the
AB = log τiρ − log β (18)
overshoot is at its minimum. Interestingly, ϕ is at its maximum
and when the overshoot is at its minimum. Similarly, the settling
time is reduced as γ is varied. However, after some point, it
CD = log γ − log τiρ . (19)
reaches its minimum and starts to increase again. Furthermore,
To obtain the relationship between the poles and zeroes of the the settling time is directly influenced by ωz . Therefore, there
proposed controller, (18) and (19) are substituted in (17) as exists a point where the overshoot is minimum, and the settling
time is significantly decreased.
log τiρ − log β = log γ − log τiρ K(s) consists of two poles and a zero. Since the zero is
log (βγ) = 2 log(τiρ ). always in between the two poles, the zero together with one
pole forms the lead part, while the other pole together with the
Therefore, the condition that the poles of the GVSG need to zero forms the lag part of the controller. Therefore, as shown
satisfy to guarantee the desired RoCoF relay limit compliance is in Fig. 6(b), another interesting observation is that the lead
part of the controller adds phase to the overall φ(ω) while the
lag part removes phase from φ(ω). This becomes progressively
2
βγ = τiρ . (20) prominent as β and γ move away from each other.
To achieve fast power reference tracking with minimal over-
C. Achieving Accurate Power Reference Tracking shoot, β and γ are placed such that ϕ is close to its maximum.
In the GC mode, the GFMI must follow the power reference ϕ is defined as
commands received from the AGC as accurately as possible. ϕ = φ(ωz ) − (−π), (22)
Hence, the proposed controller is designed such that the closed-
loop step response has a minimal overshoot and a short settling where φ(ωz ) is the phase at ωz . An expression for φ(ω) is derived
time. To this end, the open-loop transfer function of the system considering the argument of (21) as
is considered, and the corresponding closed-loop step response
−π
is analyzed. The open-loop frequency response of the system φ(ω) = + arctan(αω) − arctan(βω) − arctan(γω).
(L(jω)) is defined as 2
(23)
L(jω) = G(jω)K(jω)
Substituting for φ(ωz ) from (22) in (23),
kg (jαω + 1)
= . (21) Lead part
jω(jβω + 1)(jγω + 1) π  ︸ ︷
ϕ = − arctan(βωz ) + arctan(αωz ) − arctan(γωz ). (24)
L(jω) and the corresponding closed-loop step responses for 2︸ ︷ 
five different sets of controller gains are shown in Fig. 6. α Lag part

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RATHNAYAKE et al.: GENERALIZED VIRTUAL SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONTROL DESIGN FOR RENEWABLE POWER SYSTEMS 1027

Next, ωz at the maximum of ϕ is calculated by taking the

derivative of (24) as

dϕ α β γ
= − − (25)
dωz 1 + α2 ωz2 1 + β 2 ωz2 1 + γ 2 ωz2 Fig. 7. Control block diagram of the GVSG with a damping correction loop.
and equating (25) to zero as follows:
(αβ 2 γ 2 + βα2 γ 2 + γα2 β 2 )ωz4 + (α(β 2 + γ 2 ) gains a, b, and c are calculated using a = α, b = βγ/(β + γ − α),
and c = (β + γ − α)/Dp .
+β(α2 + γ 2 ) + γ(α2 + β 2 ))ωz2 + αβγ = 0. (26)
The roots of (26) give ωz in terms of β at the maximum ϕ. Since D. Compensated Generalized Virtual Synchronous Generator
|L(jωz )| = 1, evaluating |L(jω)| at ωz provides the value of As shown in Section III-C, the proposed GVSG controller
β that ensures ϕ is at the maximum. However, calculating the is designed to track the power reference commands with less
roots of (26) in terms of β is an arduous task as (26) is a quartic overshoot and short settling time in the GC mode. However,
polynomial. as shown in the following section, the step response of the
Instead, the phase of the lead term (φ (ω)) of the controller GVSG still results in an overshoot. This overshoot can be further
that adds phase to L(jω) is considered in this paper. This damped with a compensator. Therefore, the proposed GVSG
simplifies the complexity of solving a quartic polynomial and controller is further enhanced with a compensator, and in this
gives a sufficiently close solution. As shown in (24), assume paper, this controller is referred to as the CGVSG.
(αs + 1)/(γs + 1) as the part that adds phase to L(jω). There- The closed-loop system with the GVSG controller (Gcl (s)) is
fore, φ (ω) is calculated as
kg Dp (as + 1)
Gcl (s) = .
φ (ω) = arctan (αω + 1) − arctan (γω + 1). (27) (Dp bcs3 + (a + Dp c)s2 + (1 + kg Dp a)s + kg Dp )
(33)
One can obtain ω at the maximum of φ (ω) (ωmax ) as
1 The zero in (33) makes the closed-loop response of the system
arg maxωmax ∈R (φ (ω)) = √ . (28) fast. However, this results in an undesirable overshoot as well.
αγ
As shown in [31]–[33], the damping of the step response of
On the other hand, |L(jωz )| = 1. |L(jωz )| is calculated as the GFMI in the GC mode can be further increased by adding
 a damping correction loop. The damping correction loop is
Dp kg α2 ωz2 + 1 essentially the derivative of the measured power fed into the
|L(jωz )| =  = 1. (29)
ωz (β 2 ωz2 + 1)(γ 2 ωz2 + 1) controller in addition to the typical power error. This can be
To ensure the maximum phase introduced by the lead part of the easily realized with the GVSG by simply moving the zero of the
√ controller to the power feedback path, as shown in Fig. 7. This
controller is at ωz , |L(jωz )| is evaluated at ωmax = 1/ αγ as
follows: is similar to a proportional-derivative (PD) term.
 The control law of the controller with a compensator is
1
Dp kg α2 αγ +1 Dp
 = 1. (30) Δω = ΔPref
√1 (β 2 1 + 1)(γ 2 1 + 1) (Dp bcs2 + (a + Dp c)s + 1)
αγ αγ αγ
Dp (as + 1)
This ensures that ωz is equal to ωmax . Consequently, ϕ is close − ΔP. (34)
(Dp bcs2 + (a + Dp c)s + 1)
to its maximum. Then, (16) and (20) are substituted in (30), and
after simplifying (30), β is derived as Therefore, the closed-loop transfer function with a compensator
√ (Gcl (s)) is
2 2
2 3 kg D p
β = τiρ − 1. (31) kg D p
τiρ Gcl (s) = .
(Dp bcs + (a + Dp c)s2 + (1 + kg Dp a)s + kg Dp )
3

Therefore, by substituting for β from (31) in (20), γ can be found (35)

as In comparison with (33), the zero is removed from (35) without
1
γ= √ . (32) affecting the poles of the closed-loop system. Furthermore, (34)
2 2 shows that this modification does not affect the Δω/ΔP part
3 kg D p
ρ −1 of the control law. In fact, it is identical to (14). Therefore, the
τi
RoCoF relay limit compliance is preserved with the proposed
Consequently, α, β, and γ are chosen according to (16), (31), and compensator. This is validated in the performance evaluation
(32), respectively, to ensure the step response in the GC mode section.
has a low overshoot and short settling time, while adhering to the As shown in Fig. 7, the proposed controller with a compen-
RoCoF relay limit in the SA mode. Finally, the actual controller sator includes a derivative term in the feedback path. To avoid

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1028 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

Fig. 8. The control block diagram of the CGVSG control.

TABLE II
PARAMETERS USED FOR THE CONTROL DESIGN

Fig. 9. A 1 kW step-change in active power in a grid with: (a) SCR = 10.6,

(b) SCR = 3.9, and (c) SCR = 1.9.

That is, the switch SW1 is closed while the switch SW2 is kept
open. A step change of 1 kW is applied to Pref at t = 2 s. In the
following, the performance of the GVSG and the CGVSG upon
this step change is evaluated based on the overshoot and settling
time for two grid strength scenarios. Overshoot is based on the
maximum value of the step response, and the settling time is
defined as the time it takes for the response to stay within 2% of
the steady-state value.
the implementation difficulties associated with derivative terms, The power grid is constantly changing. Therefore, the con-
the control block diagram shown in Fig. 8 is proposed instead. trollers must be capable of working in a wide range of conditions.
The implementation of the controller shown in Fig. 8 is straight- Hence, the controller performance is tested at different SCRs.
forward as it consists of well-known and easy to implement The SCR characterizes the strength of an ac system and is
PI controller and low-pass filter blocks. Fig. 8 shows the control calculated as
block diagram of the CGVSG. The control law for the controller
shown in Fig. 8 is identical to (34). Therefore, the closed-loop 1
SCR = , (36)
system is identical to (35). The control gains are tuned using the Xp.u.
g
same control design procedure given in Section III. Therefore,
the control gains α, β, and γ are chosen according to (16), where Xp.u.
g is the per unit grid impedance in Sn base [34], [35].

(31), and (32), respectively. Finally, the control gains of the The controller performance is tested at three grid conditions
CGVSG are calculated as a = α, b = βγ/(β + γ − α), and of SCR = 10.6, SCR = 3.9, and SCR = 1.9. The simulation
c = (β + γ − α)/Dp . The improvement in damping compared results for a 1 kW step change in the GC mode for SCR = 10.6,
to the VSG and the GVSG is shown in the next section. SCR = 3.9, and SCR = 1.9 are shown in Fig. 9.
The step responses of the VSG, the GVSG, and the CGVSG
in the GC mode for SCR = 10.6 are shown in Fig. 9(a). The step
E. Performance Evaluation
response of VSG has an overshoot of 74.3%, while the settling
The performance of the GVSG and the CGVSG is tested time is around 7.1 s. In contrast, the overshoot with the GVSG is
against the performance of the VSG in a simulation environment only 27.8%, and the settling time is around 3.38 s. Furthermore,
in MATLAB/Simulink using the Simscape electrical library and there is no overshoot with the CGVSG, and the settling time is
PLECS blockset. The schematic diagram of the test system is 3.11 s. Therefore, compared to the VSG and the GVSG control,
shown in Fig. 1, and the corresponding values of the parameters the overshoot and settling time are both significantly reduced
are listed in Table I. The parameters used for the control design with the CGVSG for SCR = 10.6.
are given in Table II . α, β, and γ are chosen according to (16), The step responses of the VSG, the GVSG, and the CGVSG
(31), and (32), respectively. Consequently, the control gains of in the GC mode for SCR = 3.9 are shown in Fig. 9(b). The step
the GVSG and the CGVSG are calculated as follows: a = α, response of VSG has an overshoot of 54.4%, while the settling
b = βγ/(β + γ − α), and c = (β + γ − α)/Dp . time is around 6.1 s. In contrast, the overshoot with the GVSG is
1) Accurate Power Reference Tracking in the GC Mode: The only 34.4%, and the settling time is around 4.25 s. Furthermore,
objective of this test is to evaluate the performance of the GVSG the overshoot with the CGVSG is only 6%, and the settling
and the CGVSG in the GC mode in terms of tracking the power time is 3.78 s. Therefore, compared to the VSG and the GVSG
reference commands as accurately as possible. To this end, the control, the overshoot and settling time are both significantly
system of Fig. 1 is adopted when the GFMI is in the GC mode. reduced with the CGVSG for SCR = 3.9.

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RATHNAYAKE et al.: GENERALIZED VIRTUAL SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONTROL DESIGN FOR RENEWABLE POWER SYSTEMS 1029

The step responses of the VSG, the GVSG, and the CGVSG
in the GC mode for SCR = 1.9 are shown in Fig. 9(c). The step
response of VSG has an overshoot of 31.3%, while the settling
time is around 5.8 s. In contrast, the overshoot of the GVSG
is 27.2%, and the settling time is around 5.1 s. However, the
overshoot with the CGVSG is only 9.4%, and the settling time
is 4.4 s. Therefore, compared to the VSG and the GVSG control,
Fig. 10. Frequency trajectory in the SA mode following a load disturbance.
the overshoot and settling time are both considerably reduced
with the CGVSG for SCR = 1.9.
As shown in Fig. 9(a), (b), and (c), the performance of the step
response with the VSG controller deteriorates as the grid strength
is increased. The overshoot and settling time both increase
significantly with the VSG controller as the SCR is increased.
This is consistent with the findings in the literature as GFMIs
are prone to instability as the grid strength is increased. As
the grid strength is increased, the grid impedance is decreased.
Therefore, even for very small angle deviations, large swings in
power that could ultimately lead the GFMI to lose synchronism
with the grid are resulted [36]–[38]. On the other hand, the Fig. 11. Experimental setup.
impact of SCR on the performance of the GVSG and the CGVSG
is relatively marginal. The effect on the overshoot and settling
time with the GVSG and the CGVSG as the SCR is increased Therefore, both the GVSG and the CGVSG conform to RoCoF
is relatively minor compared to that with the VSG control. relay limits and provide more virtual inertia than the VSG.
Especially, as shown in Fig. 9(a), (b), and (c), the performance
of the CGVSG is considerably robust over the considered range IV. EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION
of SCR. Therefore, as shown in Fig. 9(a), (b), and (c), as the
The superior performance of the GVSG and the CGVSG over
grid strength increases, the GVSG and the CGVSG significantly
the VSG control is corroborated using an experimental labora-
outperform the VSG controller.
tory setup, as shown in Fig. 11. A Regatron TC.ACS three-phase
2) RoCoF Relay Limit Compliance in the SA Mode: The
grid simulator is used as the grid. An Imperix SiC-based power
main objective of this test is to evaluate the performance of the
inverter controlled by an Imperix BBox control unit is used as the
GVSG and the CGVSG in the SA mode in terms of providing
three-phase two-level inverter. A MAGNA-POWER dc source
virtual inertia to slow down the high initial RoCoF following a
set at 350 V is used as the dc source. The one-line diagram of
load disturbance. The proposed controller must conform to the
the test setup is shown in Fig. 1. All parameters of the laboratory
RoCoF relay withstand limit considered in the design process.
experiment are identical to the ones used in the simulation, and
In this paper, a RoCoF relay limit of 1 Hz/s is considered up
their values are listed in Table I.
to a disturbance size of 1 kW. To this end, the system shown in
Six tests are conducted to validate the performance of the
Fig. 1 is operated in the SA mode. That is, both SW1 and SW2
GVSG and the CGVSG. First, the controller performance is
switches are kept open. Then, to administer a load disturbance,
evaluated in the GC mode. In the GC mode, an active power
the L2 load is connected at t = 2 s by closing the SW2 switch.
set-point change is administered. Second, the RoCoF relay limit
The system is initially injecting a local load of 470 W. The
conformity in the SA mode of the GVSG and the CGVSG is
GFMI is subjected to a load change of 750 W at 2 s. The control
tested by subjecting the GFMI to a load change of 750 W. Third,
parameters of VSG are chosen such that the VSG control adheres
the frequency support capabilities of the CGVSG to support
to the RoCoF relay limit in the SA mode up to a disturbance
the grid during frequency transients are assessed. Fourth, the
size of the rating of the inverter. Therefore, RoCoF with VSG
performance of the CGVSG in a multi-inverter network is tested.
can be considered as a guide to assess whether RoCoF with the
Fifth, the performance of the CGVSG during the transition from
GVSG and the CGVSG are within the considered RoCoF relay
GC to SA mode and vice versa is evaluated. Finally, as the sixth
limit.
test, the performance of the CGVSG in a wide-area model is
The corresponding frequency changes with the VSG, the
tested. Note that in the first two tests, the performance of all
GVSG, and the CGVSG in the SA mode are shown in Fig. 10. As
three controllers, i.e., VSG, GVSG, and CGVSG, are contrasted.
shown in Fig. 10, the initial RoCoF with the GVSG is less than
However, for the rest of the tests, the GVSG is not considered
that of the VSG. Furthermore, since RoCoF over time is much
as the CGVSG is the main contribution of this paper.
less with the GVSG compared to that of the VSG, it implies that
the GVSG provides more virtual inertia than the VSG to slow
down RoCoF. As shown in Fig. 10, the frequency trajectory with A. Accurate Power Reference Tracking in the GC Mode
the CGVSG following a load change is identical to that of the The objective of this test is to experimentally validate the
GVSG as the post-disturbance frequency trajectory is governed performance of the GVSG and the CGVSG against the VSG in
by (14), and it is identical for both the GVSG and the CGVSG. the GC mode in terms of tracking the power reference commands

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1030 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

Fig. 12. Experimental results for a 1 kW step change in active power in GC Fig. 13. Experimental results for a 1 kW step change in active power in
mode for an SCR = 10.6: (a) step response of active power, (b) change in GC mode for an SCR = 1.9: (a) step response of active power, (b) change
frequency, (c) change in the grid current, and (d) change in the PCC voltage. in frequency, (c) change in the grid current, and (d) change in the PCC voltage.

while the settling time is around 5.9 s. In contrast, the overshoot

as accurately as possible. To this end, the system depicted in
of the GVSG is around 27%, and the settling time is around 5.2 s.
Fig. 1 is operated in the GC mode. Then, a step change of 1 kW
Furthermore, the overshoot with the CGVSG is only 9.2%, and
is applied to Pref at t = 2 s. In the following, the performance of
the settling time is around 4.2 s. Therefore, compared to the VSG
the GVSG and the CGVSG upon this step change is evaluated
control, the overshoot and settling time both are significantly
against the VSG based on the overshoot and settling time for
reduced with the GVSG and the CGVSG. Fig. 13(b) shows the
two grid strength scenarios.
frequency change corresponding to the step-change in power
1) SCR = 10.6 Scenario: The experimental results for a 1 kW
for SCR = 1.9. The frequency with the VSG has a higher peak
power reference step change in the GC mode for SCR = 10.6
than with the GVSG, although RoCoF is similar. However, the
are shown in Fig. 12. The active power step responses with the
peak and RoCoF both are significantly less with CGVSG. The
VSG, the GVSG, and the CGVSG are shown in Fig. 12(a). The
grid current and the PCC voltage with the CGVSG are shown in
step response of the VSG has an overshoot of 74%, while the
Fig. 13(c) and (d), respectively.
settling time is around 7.15 s. In contrast, the overshoot of the
GVSG is 28%, and the settling time is around 4.3 s. Furthermore,
there is no overshoot with the CGVSG and the settling time is B. RoCoF Relay Limit Compliance in the SA Mode
3.1 s. Therefore, compared to the VSG control, the overshoot The main objective of this test is to experimentally validate
and settling time are both significantly reduced with the GVSG the performance of the GVSG and the CGVSG against the VSG
and the CGVSG. Fig. 12(b) shows the internal frequency change in the SA mode in terms of providing virtual inertia to slow
corresponding to the step-change in power for SCR = 10.6. The down the high initial RoCoF following a load disturbance. The
frequency with the VSG has a higher peak than with the GVSG, GVSG and the CGVSG must conform to a RoCoF relay limit
although RoCoF is similar. However, the peak and RoCoF both of 1 Hz/s up to a disturbance size of 1 kW. To this end, the
are significantly less with the CGVSG. The grid current and the system shown in Fig. 1 is operated in the SA mode. The system
PCC voltage with the CGVSG are shown in Fig. 12(c) and (d), is initially injecting a local load of 470 W. Then, the GFMI is
respectively. subjected to a load change of 750 W at t = 2 s. In the following,
2) SCR = 1.9 Scenario: The simulation results for a step- the performance of the CGVSG in the SA mode is evaluated in
change in the GC mode for SCR = 1.9 are verified with ex- terms of providing virtual inertia to slow down the high initial
perimental results, as shown in Fig. 13. The step responses of RoCoF following a load disturbance. The control parameters of
the VSG, the GVSG, and the CGVSG are shown in Fig. 13(a). VSG are chosen such that the VSG control adheres to the RoCoF
The step response of the VSG has an overshoot of around 31%, relay limit in the SA mode up to a disturbance size of the rating

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RATHNAYAKE et al.: GENERALIZED VIRTUAL SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONTROL DESIGN FOR RENEWABLE POWER SYSTEMS 1031

Fig. 15. Experimental results for a grid frequency change of -0.15 Hz with
the CGVSG: (a) the change in active power, (b) the change in frequency, (c) the
change in the grid current, and (d) the change in the PCC voltage.
Fig. 14. Experimental results for a load disturbance of 750 W in SA mode:
(a) change in active power, (b) change in frequency, (c) change in the grid current,
and (d) change in the PCC voltage.
the frequency support capability of the CGVSG. The system
is initially injecting zero power to the grid, whose frequency
of the inverter. Therefore, RoCoF with VSG can be considered is 50 Hz. Then, the grid frequency is changed from 50 Hz
as a guide to assess whether RoCoF with the GVSG and the to 49.85 Hz at t = 2 s to subject the GFMI to a frequency
CGVSG are within the considered RoCoF relay limit. disturbance. In the following, the frequency support capability
The experimental results are shown in Fig. 14. The load of the CGVSG is assessed based on the injected power to support
change of 750 W at t = 2 s is shown in Fig. 14(a). The the grid.
corresponding frequency changes with the VSG, the GVSG, and The experimental results are shown in Fig. 15 for the fre-
the CGVSG are shown in Fig. 14(b). As shown in Fig. 14(b), quency support capability test. Fig. 15(a) shows the active power
the initial RoCoF with the GVSG is less than VSG. Moreover, response for the grid frequency change. Since Dp is equal to
RoCoF over time is much less with the GVSG than the VSG, π/1000 rd s−1 /W in this paper, the corresponding power change
which implies that GVSG provides more virtual inertia than the for a frequency change of 0.15 Hz is equal to 300 W. Therefore,
VSG to slow down RoCoF. The frequency trajectory with the as shown in Fig. 15(a), after the initial transient period, the power
CGVSG following a load change is identical to the frequency settles around the desired power injection level of 300 W for
trajectory with the GVSG as (15) is identical for both GVSG a frequency fall of 0.15 Hz. The internal frequency change is
and CGVSG. (15) governs the post-disturbance frequency tra- shown in Fig. 15(b). Before the frequency event, the internal fre-
jectory for both GVSG and CGVSG. Therefore, both GVSG and quency is synchronized to the grid frequency of 50 Hz. Following
CGVSG conform to the RoCoF relay limit and provide more the frequency perturbation, the internal frequency accurately
virtual inertia than the VSG. The grid current and PCC voltage tracks the grid frequency change and settles at 49.85 Hz. The
with the CGVSG are shown in Fig. 14(c) and (d), respectively. grid current and the PCC voltage with the CGVSG are shown in
Fig. 15(c) shows the sudden increase of the grid current due to Fig. 15(c) and (d), respectively. Fig. 15(c) shows the increment
the connection of the load while Fig. 15(d) shows the phase angle of the grid current over time following the frequency event,
change of the PCC voltage at t = 2 s due to the load change. while Fig. 15(d) shows that the magnitude of the PCC voltage
is unaffected, although the frequency is varied.
C. Frequency Support Capability
D. Multi-Inverter Test in SA Mode
In this test, the frequency support capability of the GVSG
and the CGVSG is experimentally verified. Frequency support The performance of the CGVSG in the SA mode with multiple
is a critical service provided by GFMIs to assist the power grid GFMIs is validated in this test. The main objective of this test is
during contingencies such as the tripping of large generators. to verify whether both CGVSGs utilized in this test are able to
The system shown in Fig. 1 is operated in the GC mode to test conform to the RoCoF relay limit of 1 Hz/s up to a disturbance

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1032 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

Fig. 18. Test system used for transition between the GC and SA modes.

E. Transition Between GC and SA Modes

As unintentional islanding events are sudden and unexpected,
Fig. 16. Test system used for multi-inverter test in SA mode.
immediate switching between separate controllers and gains
unique to the GC and the SA modes is not possible within such a
short time. Furthermore, switching between separate controllers
and gains for the GC and the SA modes require additional fast
islanding detection schemes and time. The proposed CGVSG-
based GFMIs are capable of operating in both GC and SA modes.
Consequently, GFMIs equipped with the CGVSG could undergo
transitions from the GC to the SA mode and the SA to the GC
mode seamlessly, without the need for additional fast islanding
detection schemes.
In this test, the performance of the CGVSG during the transi-
tion from the GC to the SA mode and the SA to the GC mode is
evaluated, and it is verified that the proposed CGVSG controller
Fig. 17. Results for a load disturbance of 1.5 kW in a multi-inverter network enables a seamless transition from the GC to the SA mode and
in SA mode: (a) step response of active power and (b) change in frequency. vice versa. The test system shown in Fig. 18 is used to test
the performance of the CGVSG during the transition between
the GC and SA modes. The SW4 breaker is used to connect the
GFMI to the grid, and the SW5 breaker is used to connect the
size corresponding to their ratings. To this end, the test system L5 load to the GFMI. L5 is around 920 W. When the GFMI is
shown in Fig. 16 is used. Two inverters called INV1 and INV2 in the GC mode, both SW4 and SW5 are closed. On the other
are used in this test. The rating of INV1 is 1 kW, and INV2 is hand, when the GFMI is operated in the SA mode, both SW4
rated twice as much as INV1. They both have a droop coefficient and SW5 are opened.
of 1%. Therefore, Dp of INV1 is π/1000, whereas Dp of INV2 1) Transition From GC to SA Mode: Islanding events that
is π/2000. Both INV1 and INV2 are connected to a load (L3 ) via transit the GFMI from the GC to the SA mode could be either
a resistance (Rg ) and an inductance (Lg ) of 0.15 Ω and 5.18 mH, intentional or unintentional. Unintentional islanding events are
respectively. At the beginning, INV1 and INV2 are feeding L3 more critical as they are sudden and unexpected. Therefore,
with a size of 1.5 kW. At t = 2 s, the L4 load of size 1.5 kW is an unintentional islanding case is considered in this test when
connected to the GFMIs to administer a load disturbance. transitioning from the GC to the SA mode.
The simulation results are shown in Fig. 17. The load change The system shown in Fig. 18 is operated in the GC mode by
of 1.5 kW at t = 2 s is shown in Fig. 17(a). The corresponding keeping both SW4 and SW5 closed at the beginning, to test the
frequency changes of INV1 and INV2 are shown in Fig. 17(b). performance during the transition from the GC to the SA mode
As shown in Fig. 17(a), the load disturbance of 1.5 kW is with the CGVSG. The GFMI is initially injecting 320 W to the
proportionally shared by INV1 and INV2 due to their droop coef- grid. Then, at t = 2 s, SW4 is opened to disconnect the GFMI
ficients being weighted based on their ratings. Therefore, INV1 and L5 from the rest of the grid. Once SW4 is opened, the GFMI
increases its power output by 500 W, whereas INV2 increases entirely feeds L5 .
its power output by 1000 W. INV2 shares two-thirds of the load The experimental results for the transition from the GC to
as its rating is twice as much as INV1. Therefore, the design the SA mode are shown in Fig. 19. Fig. 19(a) shows the active
of the CGVSG facilitates the steady-state power sharing in the power change when the GFMI is transitioned from the GC to the
SA mode. Furthermore, as the load disturbance is appropriately SA mode. After SW4 is opened at t = 2 s, the GFMI feeds L5
shared by INV1 and INV2, as shown in Fig. 17(b), RoCoF entirely. Therefore, the output active power is increased from
following the disturbance conforms to the RoCoF relay limit 320 W to 920 W, which is an increment of around 600 W.
of 1 Hz/s. The CGVSG controllers are designed such that the The corresponding frequency change is shown in Fig. 19(b).
initial RoCoF following a load disturbance conform to a RoCoF The transitioning from the GC to the SA mode is similar to a
relay limit of 1 Hz/s up to a disturbance size corresponding to load disturbance in the SA mode. Therefore, the initial RoCoF
their ratings. As the initial load disturbance is less than their following a transition from the GC to the SA mode conforms to
ratings, RoCoF following a load disturbance is less than 1 Hz/s. the RoCoF relay limit. This is particularly important in sudden

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RATHNAYAKE et al.: GENERALIZED VIRTUAL SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONTROL DESIGN FOR RENEWABLE POWER SYSTEMS 1033

Fig. 19. Experimental results for transitioning from the GC to SA mode: (a) Fig. 21. Experimental results for transitioning from SA to GC mode: (a)
change in active power, (b) change in frequency, (c) change in the grid current, change in active power, (b) change in frequency, (c) change in the grid current,
and (d) change in the PCC voltage. and (d) change in the PCC voltage.

used during the connection stage. Once the GFMI is connected

to the grid, the synchronization loops are not used during normal
operation. In this paper, kp,ω , ki,ω , and ki,v are chosen as 1, 40,
and 10, respectively.
As shown in Fig 1, the frequency (Δωsync ) and voltage
Fig. 20. The synchronization loops used to: (a) synchronize the capacitor (ΔVsync ) synchronization terms are added to the output of APC
voltage angle to PCC voltage angle (b) synchronize capacitor voltage magnitude
to PCC voltage magnitude. and RPC, respectively. At first, SW4 and SW5 are open, there-
fore, the GFMI is operated in the SA mode. Once the capacitor
voltage and the PCC voltage are synchronized to each other,
islanding events as a high initial RoCoF could trigger RoCoF SW4 is closed at t = 1 s. Due to the inherent 20 ms delay of the
relays or damage RoCoF sensitive equipment. Fig. 19(c) shows SW4 relay, the GFMI is connected to grid at t = 1.02 s. As soon
the sudden increase of the grid current due to the increase of as the GFMI is connected to the grid, Δωsync and ΔVsync terms
power while Fig. 19(d) shows the phase angle change of the are gradually reduced to zero without causing large disturbances.
PCC voltage at t = 2 s due to the transition from the GC to the Finally, 1 kW is injected into the grid at t = 3 s to demonstrate
SA mode. the power injection capability in the GC mode.
2) Transition From SA to GC Mode: Typically, the GFMIs The experimental results for the transition from the SA to
are connected to the grid from the SA mode during the com- the GC mode are shown in Fig. 21. Fig. 21(a) shows the active
missioning stage or once the grid returns to a healthy state after power change when the GFMI is transitioned from the SA to
an islanding event. In either case, the transition from the SA to the GC mode. As shown in Fig. 21(a), the transient at t = 1 s is
the GC mode is done in a controlled manner. First, the GFMI minimal when the GFMI is transitioned to the GC mode. Once
must be synchronized with the PCC voltage before connecting the GFMI is connected to the grid, 1 kW is injected into the grid
to the grid to avoid detrimentally high transients. Therefore, at t = 3 s. Fig. 21(b) shows the frequency change when the GFMI
a synchronization method must be used to synchronize the is transitioned from the SA to the GC mode. The effect of Δωsync
capacitor voltage to the PCC voltage. To this end, the angle can be seen until t = 1 s. Once the GFMI is connected to the grid,
and the magnitude of the capacitor voltage and the PCC voltage Δωsync term is gradually reduced to zero. As the grid frequency
must be equalized. Hence, the synchronization loops shown in is equal to the nominal frequency, the change in frequency is
Fig. 20 are used in this test to synchronize the capacitor voltage zero following the connection to the grid. Fig. 21(c) shows the
to the grid voltage. Note that the synchronization loops are only minimal increase of the grid current due to the connection to the

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1034 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

Fig. 22. Single-line diagram of the test system used for the wide-area model
test.

grid while Fig. 21(d) shows minimal change in the PCC voltage
at t = 1 s due to the transition from the SA to the GC mode.

F. Wide-Area Model Test Fig. 23. Real-time simulation results for a 2 MW of step change in active power
in a wide-area model: (a) change in active power, (b) change in frequency, (c)
The design and performance evaluation of the CGVSG con- change in the grid current, and (d) change in the PCC voltage.
troller for a wide-area model test are elaborated in this section.
To this end, a test is performed using a wide-are model to test
the overshoot and the settling time is significantly reduced with
the efficacy of the control design and evaluate the performance
the CGVSG. Fig. 23(b) shows the internal frequency change
of the CGVSG. The simplified 14-generator model of the South
corresponding to the step-change in power. The frequency with
East Australian power system is used [39] in this paper as the
the VSG has a higher peak than with the CGVSG. The grid
wide-area model. As shown in Fig. 22, a 2 MW battery energy
current and the PCC voltage with the CGVSG are shown in
storage system (BESS) is connected to bus 504 via a 275 kV to
Fig. 23(c) and Fig. 23(d), respectively.
0.69 kV transformer and a line. The SCR at the bus 510 for the
BESS is 3.9, and the X/R ratio is 10. The information related
to the model can be found in [39], and the loading case 4 as V. CONCLUSION
described in [39] is used in this study. GFMIs are increasingly getting recognized as a prominent
The control design could be done similar to the single- driver towards future highly IBR-proliferated power grids. As
machine infinite bus (SMIB) scenario explained in Section III. GFMIs possess grid-forming capabilities, they must perform
The plant model in the SMIB scenario is derived considering well in both GC and SA modes. A novel controller structure
the power flow into the grid (given in Section II). Similarly, the called the GVSG is introduced in this paper that can equally
plant model could be derived considering the small-signal model satisfy control requirements in both GC and SA modes. Further-
of the power injection into the grid, assuming the grid voltage more, an enhanced version of the GVSG called the CGVSG is
remains constant. The combined resistance and inductance of the proposed to achieve low overshoot and short settling time in step
transformer and the line, and the thevenin equivalent impedance responses in the GC mode while adhering to the RoCoF relay
of the grid are considered to be corresponding to Rg and Lg in limit in the SA mode. It is shown that the RoCoF relay limit com-
Fig. 1, respectively. Once the plant model is derived, the CGVSG pliance can be guaranteed by minimizing the high-frequency
can be designed based on (16), (31), and (32), respectively. gain of the frequency response of the controller. To this end,
Finally, the control gains of the CGVSG are calculated as a = α, a condition for the placement of the poles of the controller is
b = βγ/(β + γ − α), and c = (β + γ − α)/Dp . derived. The proposed control design to tune the controller gains
The real-time simulation of the wide-area test is done in is straightforward and only requires the gain of the plant. The
Opal-RT platform, and the results for a 2 MW power reference performance comparison with a traditional VSG shows that the
step change in the GC mode are shown in Fig. 23. The active proposed controllers outperform the traditional VSG in both
power step responses with the VSG and the CGVSG are shown GC and SA modes. The experimental results illustrate that the
in Fig. 23(a). The step response of the VSG has an overshoot proposed controllers can provide more virtual inertia than the
of 52.6%, while the settling time is around 5.92 s. In contrast, traditional VSG controller in the SA mode. Additionally, they
the overshoot with the CGVSG is only 4.15% and the settling can accurately follow the power reference commands in the GC
time is just 3.67 s. Therefore, compared to the VSG control, mode.

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
RATHNAYAKE et al.: GENERALIZED VIRTUAL SYNCHRONOUS GENERATOR CONTROL DESIGN FOR RENEWABLE POWER SYSTEMS 1035

REFERENCES [23] C. Kammer and A. Karimi, “Decentralized and distributed transient con-
trol for microgrids,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 27, no. 1,
[1] U. Markovic, O. Stanojev, P. Aristidou, E. Vrettos, D. S. Callaway, and pp. 311–322, Jan. 2019.
G. Hug, “Understanding small-signal stability of low-inertia systems,” [24] W. Du et al., “A comparative study of two widely used grid-forming
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 3997–4017, Sep. 2021. droop controls on microgrid small-signal stability,” IEEE Trans. Emerg.
[2] C. Yang, L. Huang, H. Xin, and P. Ju, “Placing grid-forming converters Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 963–975, Jun. 2020.
to enhance small signal stability of PLL-integrated power systems,” IEEE [25] E. Coelho, P. Cortizo, and P. Garcia, “Small-signal stability for parallel-
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 3563–3573, Jul. 2021. connected inverters in stand-alone AC supply systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
[3] A. Tayyebi, D. Groß, A. Anta, F. Kupzog, and F. Dörfler, “Frequency sta- Appl., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 533–542, Mar./Apr. 2002.
bility of synchronous machines and grid-forming power converters,” IEEE [26] X. Guo, Z. Lu, B. Wang, X. Sun, L. Wang, and J. M. Guerrero, “Dynamic
Trans. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1004–1018, phasors-based modeling and stability analysis of droop-controlled invert-
Jun. 2020. ers for microgrid applications,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 6,
[4] M. C. Chandorkar, D. M. Divan, and R. Adapa, “Control of parallel pp. 2980–2987, Nov. 2014.
connected inverters in standalone AC supply systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. [27] Aurecon, “Hornsdale power reserve: Year 1 technical and market
Appl., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 136–143, Jan./Feb. 1993. impact case study,” AURECON, Tech. Rep. 1, Aug. 2018. [On-
[5] N. Pogaku, M. Prodanovic, and T. C. Green, “Modeling, analysis and line]. Available: https://www.aurecongroup.com/%20markets/energy/
testing of autonomous operation of an inverter-based microgrid,” IEEE hornsdale-power-reserve-impact-study
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 613–625, Mar. 2007. [28] L. Xiong, X. Liu, D. Zhang, and Y. Liu, “Rapid power compensation
[6] L. Huang, H. Xin, and F. Dörfler, “H∞ -control of grid-connected con- based frequency response strategy for low inertia power systems,” IEEE
verters: Design, objectives and decentralized stability certificates,” IEEE Trans. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 4500–4513,
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 3805–3816, Sep. 2020. Aug. 2021.
[7] J. M. Guerrero, Luis Garcia de Vicuna, J. Matas, M. Castilla, and [29] S. D’Arco and J. A. Suul, “Equivalence of virtual synchronous machines
J. Miret, “Output impedance design of parallel-connected UPS inverters and frequency-droops for converter-based microgrids,” IEEE Trans. Smart
with wireless load-sharing control,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52, Grid, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 394–395, Jan. 2014.
no. 4, pp. 1126–1135, Aug. 2005. [30] J. Powell, G. F. Franklin, and A. Emami-Naeini, Feedback Control of Dy-
[8] H. Beck and R. Hesse, “Virtual synchronous machine,” in Proc. 9th Int. namic Systems. Harlow, Essex, U.K.:, Pearson Educ., 2014, pp. 371–372.
Conf. Elect. Power Qual. Utilisation, 2007, pp. 1–6. [31] S. Dong and Y. C. Chen, “Adjusting synchronverter dynamic response
[9] J. Driesen and K. Visscher, “Virtual synchronous generators,” in Proc. speed via damping correction loop,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 32,
IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting - Convers. Del. Elect. Energy 21st no. 2, pp. 608–619, Jun. 2017.
Century, 2008, pp. 1–3. [32] S. Dong and Y. C. Chen, “A method to directly compute synchronverter
[10] Q. Zhong and G. Weiss, “Synchronverters: Inverters that mimic syn- parameters for desired dynamic response,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,
chronous generators,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 4, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 814–825, Jun. 2018.
pp. 1259–1267, Apr. 2011. [33] J. Roldán-Pérez, A. Rodríguez-Cabero, and M. Prodanovic, “Design and
[11] L. Zhang, L. Harnefors, and H. Nee, “Power-synchronization control analysis of virtual synchronous machines in inductive and resistive weak
of grid-connected voltage-source converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., grids,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 1818–1828,
vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 809–820, May 2010. Dec. 2019.
[12] M. Guan, W. Pan, J. Zhang, Q. Hao, J. Cheng, and X. Zheng, “Synchronous [34] L. Huang et al., “Grid-synchronization stability analysis and loop shaping
generator emulation control strategy for voltage source converter (VSC) for PLL-based power converters with different reactive power control,”
stations,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 30, no. 6, p. 3093–3101, Nov. 2015. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 501–516, Jan. 2020.
[13] W. Zhang, A. Tarraso, J. Rocabert, A. Luna, J. I. Candela, and P. Ro- [35] A. Asrari, M. Mustafa, M. Ansari, and J. Khazaei, “Impedance analysis
driguez, “Frequency support properties of the synchronous power control of virtual synchronous generator-based vector controlled converters for
for grid-connected converters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 55, no. 5, weak AC grid integration,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 10, no. 3,
pp. 5178–5189, Sep. 2019. pp. 1481–1490, Jul. 2019.
[14] X. Quan, A. Q. Huang, and H. Yu, “A novel order reduced synchronous [36] X. Wang, M. G. Taul, H. Wu, Y. Liao, F. Blaabjerg, and L. Harne-
power control for grid-forming inverters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., fors, “Grid-synchronization stability of converter-based resources–an
vol. 67, no. 12, pp. 10 989–10 995, Dec. 2020. overview,” IEEE Open J. Ind. Appl., vol. 1, pp. 115–134, 2020.
[15] G. N. Baltas, N. B. Lai, L. Marin, A. Tarrasó, and P. Rodriguez, “Grid- [37] R. Rosso, X. Wang, M. Liserre, X. Lu, and S. Engelken, “Grid-forming
forming power converters tuned through artificial intelligence to damp converters: Control approaches, grid-synchronization, and future trends–a
subsynchronous interactions in electrical grids,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, review,” IEEE Open J. Ind. Appl., vol. 2, pp. 93–109, 2021.
pp. 93369–93379, 2020. [38] Z. Qu, J. C.-H. Peng, H. Yang, and D. Srinivasan, “Modeling and analysis
[16] A. Karimi et al., “Inertia response improvement in AC microgrids: A of inner controls effects on damping and synchronizing torque components
fuzzy-based virtual synchronous generator control,” IEEE Trans. Power in VSG-controlled converter,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 36, no. 1,
Electron., vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 4321–4331, Apr. 2020. pp. 488–499, Mar. 2021.
[17] J. Liu, Y. Miura, and T. Ise, “Comparison of dynamic characteristics [39] M. Gibbard and D. Vowles, “Simplified 14-generator model of the SE
between virtual synchronous generator and droop control in inverter-based Australian power system,” Univ. Adelaide, Tech. Rep. 1, Jul. 2014.
distributed generators,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 31, no. 5,
pp. 3600–3611, May 2016.
[18] W. Zhang, A. M. Cantarellas, J. Rocabert, A. Luna, and P. Rodriguez,
“Synchronous power controller with flexible droop characteristics for
renewable power generation systems,” IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 7,
no. 4, pp. 1572–1582, Oct. 2016.
[19] X. Meng, J. Liu, and Z. Liu, “A generalized droop control for grid-
supporting inverter based on comparison between traditional droop control
and virtual synchronous generator control,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., Dayan B. Rathnayake (Student Member, IEEE) re-
vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 5416–5438, Jun. 2019. ceived the B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in electrical and
[20] C. Li, Y. Yang, N. Mijatovic, and T. Dragicevic, “Frequency stability as- electronic engineering from the University of Per-
sessment of grid-forming VSG in framework of MPME with feedforward adeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, in 2014 and 2017,
decoupling control strategy,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., to be published, respectively. He is currently working toward the Ph.D.
doi: 10.1109/TIE.2021.3099236.. degree with Monash University, Melbourne, VIC,
[21] X. Li, Y. Hu, Y. Shao, and G. Chen, “Mechanism analysis and suppression Australia.
strategies of power oscillation for virtual synchronous generator,” in Proc. His research interests include control and stability
IECON - 43rd Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., 2017, pp. 4955–4960. analysis of inverter-based resources, grid integration
[22] M. Ebrahimi, S. A. Khajehoddin, and M. Karimi-Ghartemani, “An im- of renewable energy resources, and battery energy
proved damping method for virtual synchronous machines,” IEEE Trans. storage systems and their applications in large power
Sustain. Energy, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1491–1500, Jul. 2019. systems.

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
1036 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SUSTAINABLE ENERGY, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2022

Reza Razzaghi (Senior Member, IEEE) received the Behrooz Bahrani (Senior Member, IEEE) received
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the Swiss the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from the
Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne, Lausanne, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran, in
Switzerland, in 2016. 2006, the M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering from
In 2017, he joined Monash University, Melbourne, the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, in
VIC, Australia, where he is currently a Lecturer and 2008, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
an Assistant Professor with the Department of Electri- from the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
cal and Computer Systems Engineering. His research (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland, in 2012.
interests include distributed energy resources, micro- From September 2012 to September 2015, he was
grids, power system protection, and dynamics and a Postdoctoral Fellow with EPFL, Purdue University,
transients. West Lafayette, IN, USA, Georgia Institute of Tech-
He was the recipient of the 2019 Best Paper Award of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS nology, Atlanta, GA, USA, and the Technical University of Munich, Munich,
ON ELECTROMAGNETIC COMPATIBILITY and 2013 Basil Papadias Best Paper Germany. Since 2015, he has been with Monash University, Melbourne, VIC,
Award from IEEE PowerTech Conference. Australia, where he is currently a Senior Lecturer and the Director of the
Grid Innovation Hub. His research interests include control of power electronic
converters, their applications in power systems, and grid integration of renewable
energy resources.

Authorized licensed use limited to: AISSMS'S College of Engineering. Downloaded on August 11,2023 at 05:10:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.