energies

Article
Dynamic Equivalent Model Considering Multiple Induction
Motors for System Frequency Response
Zhen Tang 1 , Guoxing Mu 2 , Jie Pan 2 , Zhiwei Xue 2 , Hong Yang 1 , Mingyang Mei 3 and Zhihao Zhang 3
and Peng Kou 3, *

1 State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Research Institute, Taiyuan 030001, China
2 Dispatch and Control Center, State Grid Shanxi Electric Power Company, Taiyuan 030021, China
3 School of Electric Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Renewable energy sources have been characterized by a persistent and rapid proliferation,
which has resulted in a notable reduction in grid inertia over an extended period. There is a widely
held belief that the primary source of inertia within the grid stems from generation-side conventional
units. However, in power consumption, a significant number of induction motors are present, which
can inherently offer rotational inertia by virtue of their kinetic energy. To investigate the influence of
induction motors on grid inertia, in this paper, we propose two types of models, i.e., a detailed grid
model and a dynamic equivalent model that considers multiple induction motors. Specifically, the
detailed grid model with multiple induction motors is first established. However, the detailed model
requires the specific parameters of induction motors, which are hard to acquire in large systems.
Moreover, the accuracy of the model is unsatisfactory. To fill these gaps, the dynamic equivalent
model (DEM) is further proposed to emulate the detailed model. Compared with the detailed model,
the proposed dynamic equivalent model is structurally simple and does not require the specific
Citation: Tang, Z.; Mu, G.; Pan, J.;
parameters of induction motors. Therefore, it is possible to apply to large systems for investigating
Xue, Z.; Yang, H.; Mei, M.; Zhang, Z.; the influence of induction motors on grid frequency dynamics. A genetic algorithm is introduced
Kou, P. Dynamic Equivalent Model in order to figure out the parameters of the proposed dynamic equivalent model from historical
Considering Multiple Induction frequency data. The proposed detailed model and dynamic equivalent model are evaluated on the
Motors for System Frequency IEEE 9-bus system in MATLAB and SimPowerSystems toolbox.
Response. Energies 2023, 16, 2987.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en16072987 Keywords: frequency response; grid inertia; system equivalent model; induction motor; genetic
Academic Editors: Erika Ottaviano, algorithm
Jose Machado, Katarzyna Antosz,
Dariusz Mazurkiewicz, Yi Ren,
Pierluigi Rea, Rochdi El Abdi, Marina
Ranga, Vijaya Kumar Manupati and 1. Introduction
Emilia Villani As the combustion of fossil fuels continues to rise, countries worldwide are confronted
Received: 13 February 2023
with the dual pressures of energy requirements and environmental preservation, prompting
Revised: 14 March 2023 a heightened focus on renewable energy as a solution to these pressing global issues [1,2].
Accepted: 20 March 2023 Among all the renewable energy resources, wind energy and solar energy have attracted
Published: 24 March 2023 the most attention due to their advantages, such as wide distribution of resources, ma-
ture key technologies, short construction cycle, and pollution-free characteristics [3–6].
According to the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC), global wind power generation
capacity experienced an addition of 93.6 GW in 2021. Moreover, the worldwide cumulative
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
wind power capacity reached 837 GW with the installation of new wind power in 2021,
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
representing an annual growth rate of 12% [7]. From this point of view, it is expected that
This article is an open access article
there will be a consistent and accelerated expansion of renewable energy [8].
distributed under the terms and
To make the most of the renewable energy resources, voltage source converters
conditions of the Creative Commons
(VSCs) are introduced into the energy conversion systems [9–12]. As an intuitive example,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
Figure 1 presents a typical wind energy conversion system (WECS). From this figure, it can
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
be seen that the permanent magnet synchronous generator (PMSG)-based wind turbine is

Energies 2023, 16, 2987. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16072987 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2023, 16, 2987 2 of 23

connected to the grid through two VSCs, i.e., a rotor-side converter (RSC) and a grid-side
converter (GSC). These converters decouple the rotor speed of the wind turbine from the
grid frequency, thus reducing the grid inertia and posing a risk to the stable operation of
the power system.

PMSG based WECS

rotor-side converter grid-side converter

Figure 1. Diagram illustration of the typical PMSG-based wind energy conversion system.

Given the significance of frequency stability in power systems, it is unsurprising that

research efforts have predominantly centered on grid inertia. Currently, the literature about
grid inertia mainly focuses on the inertia of conventional generating units and renew-
able energy generating units [13–16]. Specifically, conventional generating units such as
a thermal generating unit and a hydroelectric generating unit, are connected to the grid
directly. Therefore, when the grid frequency decreases (or increases), the rotor speed of
the conventional generating unit decelerates (or accelerates). Correspondingly, the kinetic
energy stored in the rotating rotor is naturally used to provide inertial support. When it
comes to renewable energy generating units, there is a widely held belief that they make no
contribution to the grid inertia. The reason is that these renewable energy generating units
are connected to the grid through VSCs, thus they are decoupled from the grid. However,
with the proper design of an additional inertia support controller, renewable energy gen-
erating units can provide inertia support to the grid, thus increasing grid inertia [17–20].
Specifically, in addition to generation-side units, there are a considerable amount of induc-
tion motors on the consumption-side, as shown in Figure 2. These induction motors can
also contribute to grid inertia due to their stored kinetic energy. In a power system with
a high penetration of renewable energy, the influence of induction motors on grid inertia
becomes more prominent.

Conventional generating units Renewable generating units

Generation-side

Hydroelectric Thermal power Wind power Photovoltaic

power generation generation generation power generation

Induction
Consumption-side

motor

High energy consuming enterprise commercial customer residential customer

Figure 2. Diagram illustration of generation-side units and consumption-side customers in a power

system.

To the best of our knowledge, only few studies have addressed the impact of induction
motors on grid inertia [21–23]. In [21], Zhou et al. established the induction motor model
during the frequency regulation process and derived its transfer function by linearizing
the relationship between active power and induction motor slip. Furthermore, in [22],
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 3 of 23

Chen et al. formulated the induction model as a proportionate decrease in electromagnetic

power with respect to the frequency deviation. In [23], from the viewpoint of power
balance, Wang et al. constructed a model of the induction motor in the electromechanical
transient process and presented a voltage magnitude-phase dynamic analysis. Although
these studies revealed that consumption-side induction motors in a grid do affect grid
inertia, they shared a common limitation, that is, only one aggregated induction motor
was considered. On the one hand, it is hard to obtain the parameters of the aggregated
induction motors in practice. On the other hand, induction motors operate at different
operating points and using one aggregated model may introduce errors. From this point of
view, there is still a lack of research on the grid frequency response model that considers
multiple induction motors.
In addition to the grid frequency response model that considers multiple induction
motors, it remains a challenge to apply the model in practice due to its complex structure
and the requirements of the specific parameters of induction motors. As a result, the
dynamic equivalent model (DEM) is urgently needed to reduce computation efforts while
ensuring calculation accuracy. This can be achieved using the data-driven approach [24–27].
In fact, the data-driven approach has been widely used in studying power systems. In [24],
to develop the dynamic equivalent model, Hu et al. presented a data-driven inertial
response identification algorithm (IRIA). With this algorithm, the inertial support of the
wind farm was emulated. Moreover, the inertia constant of the wind farm is further
identified based on the grid frequency and wind farm power output. In [25], based on
the data-driven method, Liu et al. presented a power flow linearization approach. This
data-driven-based method can simplify and accelerate the calculation of a power system’s
control, operation, and optimization. In Zheng et al. [26], an electricity theft detection
approach was developed based on the data-driven method. By combining the clustering as
well as the maximum information coefficient technique, the data-driven based approach
can detect the electricity thefts in a faster and more accurate way. In Jiang et al. [27], a
data-driven-based mode estimator was established for investigating inter-area oscillation
which occurs in actual power systems. With this estimator, the inter-area oscillation mode
in the China Southern Power Grid can be identified using phaser measurement units under
both ring-down and ambient conditions. However, using the data-driven approach to
develop the grid dynamic equivalent model to emulate the frequency dynamics of grid
with multiple induction motors is rarely discussed.
From the above observations, we confront two main issues to investigate the influence
of the induction motors on the inertia of a power system. The first issue is developing a
grid frequency response model that considers multiple induction motors, while the second
issue is reducing the complexity of the grid frequency response model while ensuring its
calculation accuracy. To fill these gaps, in this work, firstly, a detailed grid model that
considers multiple induction motors is established. Furthermore, considering the fact that
the detailed model requires the specific parameters of induction motors, which are hard
to acquire in large systems, a dynamic equivalent model is established to emulate the
detailed one. Moreover, a data-driven method is introduced to figure out the parameters
of the proposed dynamic equivalent model from historical frequency data. The proposed
dynamic equivalent model is structurally simple and does not require specific parameters
of induction motors compared with the detailed model. Therefore, it is possible to employ
it in actual large systems.
The key contributions of the paper are threefold.
• A detailed grid model incorporating multiple induction motors is established to
imitate the influence of induction motors on grid inertia.
• To address the limitations of the detailed grid model, a dynamic equivalent model
is further proposed. Compared with the detailed model, the proposed dynamic
equivalent model is structurally simple and does not require the specific parameters
of induction motors. Thus, it is possible to apply it to large systems.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 4 of 23

• A genetic algorithm-based approach is introduced to identify the parameters of the

dynamic equivalent model. Its optimality is guaranteed by an ad hoc approach.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 develops a detailed frequency
response model considering multiple induction motors. Based on the detailed grid fre-
quency response model, a dynamic equivalent model incorporating multiple induction
motors is further derived using the genetic algorithm in Section 3. The proposed dynamic
equivalent model is structurally simple and does not require the specific parameters of
induction motors compared with the detailed model. In Section 4, the case studies are
employed to evaluate performance of the detailed grid frequency response model and the
dynamic equivalent model. Finally, a conclusion is drawn in Section 5.

2. Modeling of the Grid with Multiple Induction Motors

The detailed grid frequency response model incorporating multiple induction motors
is developed in this section. With this detailed model, the influence of the induction motors
on grid inertia can be investigated.
To derive the detailed model, firstly, a small signal model of introduction motors
is proposed in the Laplace domain. Secondly, the above model is aggregated into the
low-order system frequency response model. This aggregated model is exactly the detailed
model of the grid that considers multiple induction motors. Compared with the current grid
frequency response model, this detailed model includes not only the frequency response
dynamics of the generating-side units, but also that of the multiple induction motors.

2.1. Low-Order System Frequency Response Model

The deviation of the utility grid frequency from its nominal value occurs once there is
an active power imbalance between the grid load and generation. The low-order frequency
response model of the grid, which is simple and fairly precise, can be employed to emulate
this frequency behavior [28]. This low-order system frequency response model is capable
of filtering out synchronizing oscillations between onshore conventional generation units,
while still retaining the average frequency behavior. This low-order system model dynamics
can be described as

d( ∆ f ) D 1
=− ∆f + (∆Pd + ∆Pg ) (1)
dt 2H 2H
where ∆ f denotes grid frequency deviation, H presents the grid inertia constant, usually
within 3~9 s [29], D denotes the frequency damping coefficient of the utility grid, ∆Pg
represents the conventional generators’ power variation subsequent to the occurrence of a
load disturbance, and ∆Pd is grid load disturbance resulting from sudden load changes,
either load increases or load decreases. In (1), the dynamics of ∆Pg and ∆Pd are [30]

∆Pd = Pd,m · ε(t − t0 ) (2)

d(∆Pg ) 1 Km FH d(∆ f ) Km
=− · ∆Pg + · + · ∆f (3)
dt TR R dt TR R
Here, Pd,m is the magnitude of the load disturbance in utility grid and ε(t − t0 ) is the step
signal indicating the occurrence of a load disturbance at time instant t0 . The reheat time
constant TR is a factor that predominantly influences the response of the majority of reheat
turbine power output, typically within 6~14 s, Km is the mechanical power gain factor and
it is subject to the influence of the system spinning reserve and power factor, while FH
represents the high-pressure fraction of the turbine, usually within 0.15~0.4 [28], and R
denotes governor speed regulation.
The Laplace domain representation can also be used to express the low-order system
frequency response model (1)~(3), as shown in Figure 3.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 5 of 23

1
ΔPd Δf
2Hs+D

ΔPg
Km(1+FHTRs)
R(1+TRs)

Figure 3. Schematic of the low-order frequency response model of a power system.

2.2. Induction Motor Model

In this subsection, the induction motor model will be derived. The influence of the
induction motors on grid inertia can be further investigated with this model.
In general, grid inertia is mainly contributed by the synchronous generation units.
Specifically, for the i-th synchronous generation unit in the utility grid, its inertia constant
Hsyn,i can be calculated as

Ek,i J (2π f m )2
Hsyn,i = = i (4)
SB,i 2SB,i
Here, Ek,i is the rotational kinetic energy of i-th generation unit, Ji denotes the inertia
moment of i-th generation unit, f m represents the normal frequency of the utility grid, and
SB,i denotes the rated power of i-th generation unit.
Once we obtain the inertia constants of all the synchronous generation units, the entire
inertia of the grid can be derived as

∑iN=1 Hsyn,i
H= (5)
∑iN=1 SB,i
Here, N is the number of generation units in the utility grid. From (5), it is clear that the
inertia of the utility grid is contributed to by the synchronous generation units.
In fact, in addition to the synchronous generation units, there are a considerable
amount of induction motors on the consumption-side, which can also contribute to grid
inertia due to their stored kinetic energy. Traditionally, the frequency of the utility grid is
mainly dominated by the inertial responses and the governor responses of the synchronous
generation units, thus, the inertia of the grid is sufficient. As a result, the influence of the
induction motors on grid inertia can be disregarded. However, the accelerated expansion
of the renewable generation units results in a decreasing number of on-line synchronous
generation units and, thus, reduces grid inertia significantly. In this scenario, the influence
of the induction motor on grid inertia should be addressed. Moreover, it is necessary to
investigate induction motors’ equivalent inertia.
In agreement with (4), of course, we can obtain the inertia of an induction motor, i.e.,
Hasyn , as follows

Ek,asyn Jasyn (2π f m )2

Hasyn = = (6)
SB,asyn 2SB,asyn
However, Hasyn cannot be aggregated into (5) directly because, compared with syn-
chronous generation units, there is the slip between induction motors’ rotor speed and the
grid frequency [23]. In other words, Hasyn can only roughly, but not precisely, represent the
influence of the induction motor on grid inertia. To fill this gap, a more precise equivalent
inertia constant for induction motors should be developed.
From Figure 3, we can find that the grid inertia is relative with the deviation of
power (i.e., ∆Pd and ∆Pg ) and grid frequency (i.e., ∆ f ). Inspired by this observation, the
relationship between the deviation of induction motor’s input active power (i.e., ∆Pe ) and
grid frequency (i.e., ∆ f ) should be derived to precisely investigate the influence of the
induction motor on the grid inertia.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 6 of 23

To develop the relationship between ∆Pe and ∆ f , the dynamics of the induction motor
should be established, as follows [21]

dωr
2Hasyn = Pe − Pm (7)
dt
Here, ωr is the induction motor’s rotor speed, Pe is the input electromagnetic power of
induction motor, and Pm is induction motor’s output mechanical power.
In (7), Pe can be expressed as [23]
!
Ut2 rr
Pe =  2 · (8)
sslip
r s + s rr + ( xs + xr )2
slip

Here, Ut2 is the stator voltage of induction motors, rs and rr are the stator and rotor resistance
of the induction motor, xs and xr are the stator and rotor impedance of the induction motor,
and sslip denotes the slip of induction motors, which can be described as
ω − ωr
sslip = (9)
ω
Here, ω is the rotating magnetic field speed of the stator.
Moreover, Pm in (7) can be expressed as [21]
h  ρ i
Pm = ωr k α + (1 − α) 1 − sslip (10)

Here, k, α, and ρ are depending on the load types of the induction motor.
As shown in Table 1, when ρ = 0, (10) can be rewritten as Pm /ωr = Tm = k. In this
case, the mechanical torque of the induction motor, i.e., Tm , is constant, thus the induction
motor’s load is a constant-torque load. When ρ = −1 and α = 0, (10) can be rewritten as
Pm = kω. Considering the facts that the rotating magnetic field speed of the stator, i.e., ω, is
proportional to the grid frequency and that the grid frequency is generally kept at its normal
value, kω is a constant. That is, in this case, the load of the induction motor is a constant-
power load. Moreover, when ρ = 1 and α = 0, (10) can be rewritten as Pm = kωr2 /ω, where
we can see that the mechanical power of the induction motor is proportional to ωr2 . In other
words, in this case, the load of the induction motor is a pump load.

Table 1. Different types of mechanical loads for induction motors.

ρ α Description Types
0 / Pm /ωr = Tm = k, i.e., Tm , is constant. constant-torque load
−1 0 Pm = kω is constant constant-power load
1 0 Pm = kωr2 /ω pump load

With (7)~(10), the relationship between Pe and f has been developed. To further derive
the relationship between ∆Pe and ∆ f , the conventional small-signal linearization technique
is introduced due to the fact that the induction motor usually operates around their initial
states. The linearized small-signal model is as follows

2Hasyn s∆ωr = ∆Pe − ∆Pm (11)

∆Pe = K1 ∆sslip (12)

ωr,0 1
∆sslip = 2
∆ω + (1 − )∆ωr (13)
ω0 ω 0

∆Pm = K2 ∆sslip + K3 ∆ω (14)

Energies 2023, 16, 2987 7 of 23

Here, ωr,0 denotes the initial rotor speed of the induction motor, ωr,0 is the initial rotating
magnetic field speed of the induction motor’s stator, and K1 , K2 , and K3 represent the
parameters related to the operating point of the induction motor, which can be calculated
as follows
  2   
( xs + xr )2 − rs + sslip,0
rr
Ut2 − s2rr
dPe slip,0
K1 = = 2 (15)
dsslip
 2
sslip =sslip,0 r 2
rs + s r + ( xs + xr )
slip,0

∂Pm   ρ −1
K2 = = kωr,0 ρ(1 − α) 1 − sslip,0 (16)
∂sslip
sslip =sslip,0, ωr =ωr,0

∂Pm h  ρ i
K3 = = k α + (1 − α) 1 − sslip,0 (17)
∂ωr sslip =sslip,0

Here, sslip,0 is the initial slip of the induction motor.

Equations (11)~(17) can also be described in a block diagram, which is shown in
Figure 4. For illustration purposes, the transfer function presented in Figure 4 is denoted as

∆Pe = G (s) · ∆ω (18)

Δwr
1
K3 2 Hasyn s

1
1-
w0 ΔPm

K2
w r,0
Δw K1 ΔPe
w 02 Δsslip

Figure 4. Block diagram of the induction motor’s small-signal model.

2.3. Detailed Grid Frequency Response Model Considering Multiple Induction Motors
The low-order grid frequency response model in Section 2.1 can successfully describe
the frequency dynamics of the utility grid dominated by synchronous generation units.
Nevertheless, with the accelerated expansion of renewable energy sources, the impact of
induction motors on the grid frequency dynamics becomes more prominent and requires
more attention. This motivates us to develop the detailed grid frequency response model
considering multiple induction motors. In this section, the detailed grid frequency response
model will be derived by integrating the induction motor’s small-signal model into a
low-order system frequency response model. The grid frequency dynamics that consider
multiple induction motors can be described with this detailed model. Further, the influence
of the induction motors on grid inertia can be investigated.
In Sections 2.1 and 2.2, the induction motor’s small-signal model and low-order
grid frequency response model have been derived, respectively. With this low-order
system frequency response model, we can see that the grid frequency deviation (i.e., ∆ f )
is determined by the power mismatch between the generation and load (i.e., ∆Pd − ∆Pg ).
Moreover, with the induction motor’s small-signal model, we can also find that the active
power response of the induction motor (i.e., ∆Pe ) is related to the rotating magnetic field
speed deviation of the stator (∆ω).
Because ∆ f is proportional to ∆ω, that is, ∆ f = 2πω/p, the induction motor’s small-
signal model is easily integrated into the low-order system frequency response model.
Moreover, there are many induction motors in grid, which can be clustered into a certain
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 8 of 23

number of representative induction motors according to their characteristics. Considering

these two facts, the detailed grid frequency response model considering multiple induction
motors can be derived from Sections 2.1 and 2.2, as shown in Figure 5.

Gn(s)
Δwr
1
G2(s) K3 2 Hasyn s
G1(s) 1
1-
w0 ΔPm
Δf
ΔPd
1
2p/p Δw K2
2Hs+D
w r,0
Δw K1 ΔPe
ΔPg
w 02 Δsslip
Km(1+FHTRs)
R(1+TRs)

Figure 5. Block diagram of the detailed grid frequency response model considering multiple induction
motors.

3. Dynamic Equivalent Model of the Grid and Its Identification Approach

The dynamic equivalent model of the grid considering multiple induction motors
is introduced in this section. Further, the data-driven-based approach will be developed.
With this approach, the parameters of the dynamic equivalent model can be identified, i.e.,
He and De .

3.1. Dynamic Equivalent Model of the Grid Considering Multiple Induction Motors
With the detailed grid frequency response model, the grid frequency dynamics that
consider multiple induction motors can be reproduced roughly, which will be further
verified in Section 4.1. Nevertheless, from Figure 5, we can see that this detailed model is
structurally complex and requires the specific parameters of induction motors. As a result,
it remains a challenge to apply the detailed model in practice.
To fill this gap, a grid dynamic equivalent model (DEM) will be proposed in this
section, as shown in Figure 6. From this figure, we can find the proposed DEM is the same
structure as the low-order system frequency response model, but with different parameter
values. Specifically, the grid damping coefficient and inertia constant are replaced by the
corresponding equivalent values, that is, H and D are replaced by He and De , respectively.
These two equivalent values can be identified using the data-driven approach, which will
be introduced in the next section. The DEM is structurally simpler and therefore easier to
apply in practice compared with the detailed grid frequency response model.
Once the dynamic equivalent model is derived, its parameters should be identified.
To do so, firstly, the actual system, i.e., the modified IEEE 9-bus system, is established
and evaluated. The actual IEEE 9-bus system will be present in Section 4. The evaluated
results will be shown in Section 4.2. Secondly, m scenarios are simulated by adjusting the
load disturbance ∆Pd in the actual IEEE 9-bus system. In this work, m = 3 scenarios are
simulated, where ∆Pd is set to 1%, 3%, and 5%, respectively. In this manner, the dynamic
behavior of the grid frequency can be observed, and the resulting frequency response curve
can be sampled and labeled as ∆ f (i, j). Here, i ∈ {1, 2, ..., m} represents the i-th scenario
and j ∈ {1, 2, ..., n} represents the j-th sample points in the i-th scenario. It should be
observed that the sampling rate must not surpass 1 ms, taking into account the nominal
frequency of the utility grid being 50 or 60 Hz. Any sampling rate exceeding 1 ms would
result in sampling failure [24]. Thirdly, the same simulation scenarios are repeated using
the dynamic equivalent model. Similarly, the corresponding frequency response curve
is recorded and denoted by ∆ f e (i, j). Finally, with the aim of minimizing the mismatch
between ∆ f (i, j) and ∆ f e (i, j), He and De are identified by solving the optimal problem. In
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 9 of 23

the following parts, special attention is paid to the detailed formulation and solution of the
optimal problem.

Gn(s)

G2(s)

G1(s)

1 Δf
ΔPd 2p/p Δw
2Hs+D

ΔPg
Km(1+FHTRs)
R(1+TRs)

Data-
driven

Dynamic Equivalent Model

ΔPd 1
Δf e
2Hes+De

ΔPg
Km(1+FHTRs)
R(1+TRs)

Figure 6. Block diagram of the DEM of the grid considering multiple induction motors.

3.2. Formulation of the Optimal Problem

To identify the best fitting parameters He and De , an optimal problem should be
developed. In general, there are two major elements for optimal problem formulation, i.e.,
objective function and constraints.
• Objective Function
As mentioned before, the aim of the identification approach is to minimize the mis-
match between ∆ f (i, j) and ∆ f e (i, j). In this point of view, the objective function is
described as
m n
[∆ f (i, j) − ∆ f e (i, j)]
min J = ∑∑ n
(19)
i =1 j =1

Here, n denotes the sampling point numbers in one scenario and m denotes the
simulated scenarios numbers.
• Constraints
The identified equivalent He and De should also be limited within a feasible range.
In general, the grid inertia constant is 3~9 s and the grid damping coefficient is 0~2,
which can be represented as [28]

3 ≤ He ≤ 9
(20)
0 ≤ De ≤ 2

3.3. Solution of the Optimal Problem

From (19) and (20), we can see that ∆ f (i, j) is the sampled data from the simulation of
the actual system, and as a result, the optimal problem is without stringent mathematical
formulation. Moreover, this optimal problem is highly non-convex. From these points
of view, it is difficult to obtain the solution of the optimal problem (19) and (20) using
the traditional gradient-based optimizing procedure. To address this issue, a genetic
algorithm (GA) is introduced. GAs are known for their robustness and their ability to
search adaptively for the global optimal point in a stochastic and discrete manner. They
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 10 of 23

operate based on the mechanics of natural selection and genetics, enabling them to evolve
an initial set of poor solution guesses into a set of acceptable solutions. In the following
parts, special attention is paid to the steps using a GA for identification of He and De .
As for the optimal procedure for the GA, the parameters to be identified need to first
be determined. In this paper, the damping coefficient De and grid inertia constant He
are the two parameters to be identified. In other words, He and De need to be optimized
so that the equivalent model can reproduce the actual grid frequency dynamics. Once
the parameters to be identified are determined, a set of these parameters with specific
values, i.e., vector { He , De }, constitutes an individual. Further, Np individuals generated
randomly make up the initial population. To facilitate genetic manipulation, individuals
are represented in binary form. That is, each individual is an Nb -bit Gray encoding of a
vector { He , De }.
After the population is generated, each individual, i.e., vector { He , De }, has a specific
value. Considering the fact that the main objective of the identification approach is to
minimize the mismatch between ∆ f (i, j) and ∆ f e (i, j), for k-th individual, its fitness value
can be calculated by
m n [∆ f k (i, j) − ∆ f e,k (i, j)]
Jk = ∑∑ n
(21)
i =1 j =1

Further, the average fitness value of the whole population can be represented as
Np N
Jk m n p
[∆ f l (i, j) − ∆ f e,l (i, j)]
F= ∑ Np
=∑∑∑
nNp
(22)
l =1 i =1 j =1 l =1

Here, Np is the number of individuals in the population. In this work, Np = 20.

Genetic operations, that is, mutation, crossover, and selection, can be facilitated and
the next population is generated, with fitness of individuals and population. Finally, the
iteration will be stopped as soon as the termination criterion is met. Otherwise, the fitness
of the population will be recalculated and using genetic operations, the new population
will be generated. Please refer to Table 2 for more details about the genetic operations and
termination criterion.

Remark 1. In this work, considering the fact that the optimal problem (19) and (20) is high
non-convexity, one of the intelligence algorithms, i.e., a genetic algorithm, has been employed to
identify the equivalent parameters of the grid dynamic equivalent model. However, these intelligent
algorithms may not guarantee the globally optimal values once the termination criterion has been
achieved. In other words, the solution calculated by the intelligent algorithm may be a locally optimal
one. Even worse, in the presence of an optimal problem with multiple local minima, the assurance
of achieving a globally optimal solution cannot be guaranteed upon subsequent execution of the
intelligent algorithm. Fortunately, an ad hoc approach makes it possible to fill this gap. By plotting
the J, i.e., (21), in terms of He and De , this ad hoc approach can provide the globally optimal value.
Nevertheless, there remains a concern with employing the ad hoc approach. That is, the accuracy and
computational cost of the method are determined by the mesh partition of He and De . Specifically, if
the partition step size is too large, the calculation results may not meet the required level of accuracy
and the computational cost may become prohibitively high. From the above observations, we employ
the genetic algorithm to find the optimal solution of the problem (19) and (20) . Meanwhile, the ad
hoc approach with a slightly larger partition step size is employed to guarantee the solution of the
genetic algorithm is the globally optimal one.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 11 of 23

Table 2. Steps of the GA-based identification approach.

Step Description
Initialize the population: In the initialization phase, Np individuals are created
to form the initial population. Each individual is an Nb -bit Gray encoding of a
Step 1
vector { He , De }. In other words, each individual denotes a feasible solution to
the optimal problem (19) and (20) .
Calculate fitness value: The main objective of the data-driven-based identifi-
cation approach is to minimize the mismatch between ∆ f (i, j) and ∆ f e (i, j).
As a result, for k-th individual, its  fitness value can be calculated by
Step 2 Jk = ∑im=1 ∑nj=1 ∆ f k (i, j) − ∆ f e,k (i, j) n. Correspondingly, the average fit-
N
ness value of the whole population can be represented as F = ∑k=p 1 Jk Np =

Np 
∑im=1 ∑nj=1 ∑k=1 ∆ f k (i, j) − ∆ f e,k (i, j) (nNp ).


Generate the new population by selection, crossover, and mutation.

• Selection: Some of the individuals in the current population have lower
fitness value, which means that they may the optimal solutions. As a result,
these individuals are directly selected in the next population. In this work,
5% of individuals are directly selected in the next population.
• Crossover: Besides the selection, two of the individuals are randomly
Step 3 selected and some part of their binary coding is exchanged to form the new
individuals. In this work, the crossover fraction is 0.8.
• Mutation: For the newly generated population, some of the individuals are
selected in a random way. Further, some part of these selected individuals’
binary coding is changed. In this work, the mutation fraction is 0.2.
• Individuals that do not meet the constraints (20) are removed from the
population.

Termination criterion: The iteration is stopped as soon as any one of these two
condition is met. Otherwise, the algorithm goes back to Step 2.
• The quantity of generations: The algorithm will stop when the number of
Step 4 generations reaches its threshold setting, i.e., 100.
• The change of fitness value: The algorithm will stop when the average
relative change in the fitness value is less than its threshold setting, i.e.,
0.001.

3.4. Performance Evaluation of the Grid Model Considering Multiple Induction Motors
Up to now, considering multiple induction motors, the dynamic equivalent model
and detailed grid frequency model have been proposed. Before discussing the influence of
induction motors on grid frequency with the proposed models, their performance needs to
be evaluated. In other words, the accuracy of the proposed models should be analyzed. To
do so, the following two error indicators are introduced.

| f (t) − f a (t)|
IE(t) = (23)
| f a (t) − f n |
Rt
| f (t) − f a (t)|dt
AE(t) = R0 t (24)
0 | f a ( t ) − f n |dt

Here, IE(t) denotes the instantaneous error at t, AE(t) denotes the accumulative error at
t, f a (t) is the frequency curve of the real grid, f (t) is the frequency curve of the proposed
model during a frequency event, and f n is the normal frequency of the grid, i.e., 50 Hz in
this work.
From the definitions of the two error indicators, we can see that IE(t) and AE(t)
indicate the accuracy of the proposed models. The larger the IE(t) and AE(t), the less
accurate the proposed models. That is, larger IE(t) and AE(t) indicate larger mismatch
between the frequency model and the actual grid.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 12 of 23

Remark 2. It is noted that the above two error indicators are a posteriori ones. That is, these two
indicators can be calculated only after the frequency response curves of the actual system and the
model are recorded. In other words, these two indicators cannot be used for the traditional model
alone, which are not satisfactory. This will be our future research focus.

4. Simulation Studies
The present section assesses the performance of the detailed grid frequency response
model proposed in Section 2.3 and the dynamic equivalent model proposed in Section 3.1.
To accomplish this, five cases are conducted, which are outlined as follows:
• Modified IEEE 9-bus system: The modified IEEE 9-bus system is implemented in MAT-
LAB Simulink using the Special Power Systems library, whose block diagram is shown
in Figure 7. It is the modified version of the actual IEEE 9-bus system. In the modified
system, there are three synchronous generators, that is, SG 1, SG 2, and SG 3, on
the generation-side. All of them are connected to the grid via transformers. The
parameters of these three synchronous generators are presented in Table A1. On
the consumption-side, three constant loads, i.e., Load A, Load B, and Load C, are
connected to the grid, and whose parameters are listed in Table A2. Moreover, three
induction motors, that is, IM 1, IM 2, and IM 3, are also integrated into the grid on Bus
7, Bus 5, and Bus 8, respectively. Considering that the induction motors are predomi-
nantly employed in high energy consumption enterprises, where they are either in
operation or planned to be stopped, the operation conditions of these three induction
motors are assumed unchanged, that is, they always work near the initial operation
point. The parameters of the induction motors, transformers, and transmission lines
are shown in Tables A3–A5, respectively.
• Benchmark IEEE 9-bus system: The benchmark IEEE 9-bus system is derived from the
above modified IEEE 9-bus system, whose block diagram is shown in Figure 8. The
benchmark IEEE 9-bus system is also implemented in MATLAB Simulink using the
Special Power Systems library. The only difference between these two systems is that
in the benchmark system, the induction motors are replaced with the equal capacity
constant loads. Specifically, IM 1, IM 2, and IM3 are replaced with Load 1, Load 2, and
Load 3, respectively, whose parameters are listed in Table A6.
• Detailed model: The detailed model is proposed in Section 2.3, whose block diagram
is shown in Figure 5. This model is also implemented in the MATLAB Simulink
platform.
• Dynamic equivalent model: The dynamic equivalent model is proposed in Section 3.1,
whose block diagram is shown in Figure 6. This model and its identification approach
are implemented using MATLAB scripts.
• Benchmark model: The benchmark model is proposed in [21]. In this model, only an
aggregated induction model is used to emulate the influence of induction motors on
the grid frequency dynamics.

4.1. Influence of the Induction Motors on Grid Frequency Dynamics

As mentioned in introduction, there are a considerable amount of induction motors
in a grid, which would contribute to grid inertia due to their stored kinetic energy and
mechanical loads. In this subsection, the influence of the induction motors on the grid
frequency dynamics will be presented. To do so, the frequency dynamics of different cases
are studied during the under-frequency events. To cause an under-frequency event, in the
modified and benchmark IEEE 9-bus system, a step increase of 10% active power of Load C
(i.e., 3% of total load) is simulated at 2.0 s. Correspondingly, in the detailed model, dynamic
equivalent model, and benchmark model, a step increase of 3% of total load is also simulated at
2.0 s. The result for this case is shown in Figure 9.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 13 of 23

Bus 2 Bus 7 Bus 8 Bus 9 Bus 3

SG 2 SG 3

IM 1 M

Bus 5 Bus 6
Load C M
IM 3
Load A Load B
M Bus 4
IM 2

Bus 1

SG 1

(a)

Load C IM 3
IM 1

BUS 7 BUS 8 BUS 9

BUS 3

SG 2 SG 3
BUS 2

Increasing loads at 2s
BUS 5
BUS 6

Load A Load B

IM 2
BUS 4

BUS 1

SG 1

(b)

Figure 7. The modified IEEE 9-bus system. (a) Single-line diagram. (b) Simulink block diagram.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 14 of 23

Bus 2 Bus 7 Bus 8 Bus 9 Bus 3

SG 2 SG 3

Load 1

Load 3
Bus 5 Bus 6
Load C

Load 2 Load A Load B

Bus 4

Bus 1

SG 1

Figure 8. Single-line diagram of the benchmark IEEE 9-bus system, where the induction motors are
replaced with the equal capacity constant loads.

Figure 9 presents the grid frequency dynamics of different cases during the under-
frequency event. From this figure, we can see that during the early stage of the frequency
event (i.e., 2.0~2.8 s), the frequency dynamics of the modified IEEE 9-bus system is nearly
same as that of the benchmark IEEE 9-bus system. After that, the frequency of the modified
IEEE 9-bus system is always above that of the benchmark IEEE 9-bus system. Specifically, the
frequency nadir of the modified IEEE 9-bus system is 49.87 Hz (appears at t = 5.1 s), which is
higher than that of the benchmark IEEE 9-bus system, i.e., 49.86 Hz (appears at t = 5.2 s). At the
steady-state stage, the frequency of the modified IEEE 9-bus system is steady at 49.94 Hz, while
that of the benchmark IEEE 9-bus system also constant at 49.94 Hz. The above simulation
results indicate that in addition to the synchronous units on generation-side, the induction
motors on consumption-side also have a great influence on the grid frequency dynamics.
The reason is because of the fact that when the grid frequency decreases (or increases),
the rotor speed of the induction motors decelerate (or accelerate). Correspondingly, the
kinetic energy stored in the rotating rotor is naturally used to provide frequency support.
Moreover, when the grid frequency decreases (or increases), the mechanical loads of the
inductions will change, and thus need less (or more) active power from the grid.
It is noted that from Figure 9, we can also see that in comparing the benchmark model
and detailed model, the the fidelity of the dynamic equivalent model is higher. This will be
further verified in Sections 4.2 and 4.3.

49.9
50
49.88
Frequency f (Hz)

49.95 49.86
4 5 6 7

49.9 modified IEEE 9 bus system

benchmark IEEE 9 bus system
detailed model
49.85 dynamic equivalent model
benchmark model
0 5 10 15 20
Time(s)
Figure 9. Grid frequency dynamics of different cases.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 15 of 23

Figure 10 presents the induction motors’ rotor speed dynamics in the modified IEEE
9-bus system during the under-frequency event. From this figure, we can see that after
the under-frequency event, the active power absorbed by the induction motors decreases.
The reason being that when the grid frequency decreases, the rotor speed of the induction
motors decelerates, as shown in Figure 10. Correspondingly, the kinetic energy stored in
the rotating rotor is naturally released to provide frequency support.
Moreover, in Figure 11, the induction motors’ mechanical load dynamics in the modified
IEEE 9-bus system during the under-frequency event is also presented. From this figure, we
can see that after the under-frequency event, the mechanical loads of the inductions have
changed. Specifically, when the grid frequency decreases (or increases), the mechanical
loads of the inductions correspondingly decreases (or increases), and thus need less (or
more) active power from the grid.
Form Figures 10 and 11, we can see that the consumption-side induction motors in
grid do effect the grid frequency dynamics with their kinetic energy and mechanical loads.
Moreover, this effect depends on the parameters and working conditions of the induction
motors. In this work, the parameters and working conditions of the induction motors have
been listed in Table A3, where we can see that the parameters and working conditions
of the induction motors are all different from each other. This causes the difference in
the values of the rotor speed and mechanical load of the induction motors during the
under-frequency event.

1.001
(pu)

0.999
Rotor speed

0.998
IM 1
0.997
IM 2
IM 3
0.996
0 5 10 15 20
Time(s)
Figure 10. Induction motors’ rotor speed dynamics in the modified IEEE 9-bus system during the
under-frequency event.

0.98
Mechanical load P (pu)

0.96

0.94

0.92
IM 1
0.9
IM 2
IM 3
0.88
0 5 10 15 20
Time(s)
Figure 11. Induction motors’ mechanical load dynamics in the modified IEEE 9-bus system during the
under-frequency event.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 16 of 23

4.2. Accuracy of the Detailed Grid Frequency Response Model Considering Multiple Induction
Motors
In this subsection, the accuracy of the detailed grid frequency response model consid-
ering multiple induction motors, i.e., detailed model, is evaluated.
To do so, the frequency dynamics of the modified IEEE 9-bus system and that of the
detailed model are simulated and plotted, as shown in Figure 12. From this figure, we can
see that the proposed detailed model can reproduce the grid frequency dynamics of the
modified IEEE 9-bus system with a high degree of fidelity. Specifically, during the early stage
of the frequency event (i.e., 2.0~2.8 s), the frequency dynamics of the detailed model are
nearly same as those of the modified IEEE 9-bus system. In the frequency recovery phase (i.e.,
5.1~12 s), the frequency of the detailed model is slightly higher than that of the modified IEEE
9-bus system. At the steady-state stage (i.e., 18.0~22.0 s), the frequency of the detailed model
becomes slightly lower than that of the modified IEEE 9-bus system.

50
Frequency f (Hz)

49.95

49.9

49.85 modified IEEE 9 bus system

detailed model
0 5 10 15 20
Time(s)
Figure 12. Grid frequency dynamics of the modified IEEE 9-bus system and the detailed model during
the under-frequency event.

To further verify the accuracy of the detailed grid frequency response model, its
instantaneous error and accumulative error are calculated and shown in Figure 13. To
obtain the instantaneous error and accumulative error, the frequency curve of the detailed
model is selected as f (t) in (23) and (24), meanwhile, the frequency curve of the modified
IEEE 9-bus system is selected as f n (t). From Figure 13, we can find that both the maximum
instantaneous error and maximum accumulative error are less than 10%, which appears at
t = 2.3 s. From these points of view, it is shown that the proposed detailed grid frequency
response model is a fair fidelity model.

50
IE
AE
40
Error (%)

30

20

10

0
0 5 10 15 20
Time(s)
Figure 13. Instantaneous error and accumulative error of the detailed grid frequency response model.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 17 of 23

4.3. Dynamic Equivalent Model Identification and Its Accuracy

Although the detailed model can reproduce the frequency dynamics of the grid with
multiple induction motors, it is structurally complex and requires the specific parameters
of induction motors. To fill this gap, the dynamic equivalent model is derived in Section 3.1,
and its equivalent parameters can be identified using the data-driven approach proposed
in Sections 3.2 and 3.3. In this subsection, the parameters’ identification results and the
accuracy of the proposed dynamic equivalent model are going to be presented.
Table 3 presents the inertia constant (H) and frequency damping coefficient (D) of the
detailed model. These two parameters are derived from the benchmark IEEE 9-bus system.
That is, H and D represent the original inertia constant and frequency damping coefficient
of the modified IEEE 9-bus system without considering multiple induction motors. Moreover,
the identified equivalent inertia constant (He ) and frequency damping coefficient (De ) are
also listed in Table 3, where we can see that not only does the inertia constant increase, but
the frequency damping coefficient also increases after considering the multiple induction
motors in grid.

Table 3. Parameters of the detailed model and identification results of the dynamic equivalent model.

Detailed Model Dynamic Equivalent Model

Parameter H (s) D He (s) De
Value 6.76 0.75 7.4230 1.4070

The fitness value dynamics during the identification process are plotted in Figure 14.
From this figure, the conclusion can be drawn that after 80 iterations, the fitness of the
optimal individual and the mean fitness of the population tend to be stable. This indicates
that the equivalent inertia constant (He ) and frequency damping coefficient (De ) are the
optimal solutions.
As mentioned in Section 3.3, intelligent algorithms may not guarantee the globally
optimal values once the termination criterion has been achieved. In other words, the
solution calculated by the intelligent algorithm may be a locally optimal one. To fill this
gap, the ad hoc approach is introduced. By plotting the J in terms of He and De , this ad
hoc approach can roughly provide the globally optimal value. To do so, partition step size
of He and De is set to 0.1, that is, J is plotted in terms of 61 He (i.e., 3.0, 3.1, ..., 9.0) and 21
De (i.e., 0.0 0.1, ..., 2.0). The results are shown in Figure 15. The computational cost of the
GA-based identification method and ad hoc method are listed in Table 4.

0.05
Best fitness value
Mean fitness value
0.04
Fitness value

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Iterations
Figure 14. Dynamics in fitness value during the identification process.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 18 of 23

J in Eq.21

[7.4, 1.4]

De (pu)
He (s)
(a) (b)

Figure 15. Dynamics of J in Equation (21) with different He and De . (a) 3-D graph, (b) 2-D filling graph.

From Figure 15 and Table 4, we can see that the identification results of the ad hoc
method (i.e., He = 7.4, De = 1.4) are nearly the same as those of the GA-based identification
method (i.e., He = 7.4230, De = 1.4070). In Figure 15, darker and cooler colors represent
better fit results. From this point of view, the identification results calculated by GA are
the globally optimal ones. Moreover, compared with the ad hoc method, the GA-based
identification method is more accurate, that is, its solutions can achieve accuracy up to four
decimal places. Although the ad hoc method can achieve the same accuracy by reducing
the partition step size of He and De , it is computationally expensive to do so.

Table 4. Computational cost and the identification results of the GA-based method and ad hoc method.

GA-Based Identification Method Proposed in

Method Ad Hoc Method Introduced in Remark 1
Section 3
Computational cost (s) 17.3 108.0
Best fitting He (s) 7.4230 7.4
Best fitting De (pu) 1.4070 1.4

Once the optimal equivalent inertia constant (He ) and frequency damping coefficient
(De ) are identified, the grid dynamics can be studied using the dynamic equivalent model.
Figure 16 shows the grid frequency dynamics of the modified IEEE 9-bus system, the detailed
model, and the dynamic equivalent model during the under-frequency event. As seen from this
figure, the proposed dynamic equivalent model can reproduce the grid frequency dynamics of
the modified IEEE 9-bus system with a higher degree of fidelity than the detailed model, which
benefits from the selection of multiple scenarios when identifying He and De .
Figure 17 further verifies the the accuracy of the dynamic equivalent model. In
this figure, the instantaneous error and accumulative error of the dynamic equivalent
model are calculated and presented. To obtain the instantaneous error and accumulative
error, the frequency curve of the dynamic equivalent model is selected as f (t) in (23)
and (24), meanwhile, the frequency curve of the modified IEEE 9-bus system is selected
as f n (t). From Figure 17, we can find that both the maximum instantaneous error and the
accumulative error are less than 5%. From this point of view, the fidelity of the proposed
dynamic equivalent model is higher than the detailed grid frequency response model.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 19 of 23

50

Frequency f (Hz)
49.95

49.9
modified IEEE 9 bus system
49.85 detailed model
dynamic equivalent model
0 5 10 15 20
Time(s)
Figure 16. Grid frequency dynamics of the modified system, the detailed model and the dynamic
equivalent model during the under-frequency event.

50
IE
AE
40
Error (%)

30

20

10

0
0 5 10 15 20
Time(s)
Figure 17. Instantaneous error and accumulative error of the dynamic equivalent model.

4.4. Influence of the Grid Load Disturbance on the Dynamic Equivalent Model Accuracy
In Section 3, three scenarios, where the grid load disturbance ∆Pd is set to 1%, 3%,
and 5%, are employed to identify the parameters of the dynamic equivalent model. In
this section, the influence of the grid load disturbance on the dynamic equivalent model
accuracy is going to be investigated.
To do so, five additional scenarios, where the grid load disturbance ∆Pd is set to 2%,
4%, 6%, 8%, and 10%, are employed. The frequency dynamics of the IEEE 9-bus system
and dynamic equivalent model under different load disturbance ∆Pd have been presented
in Figure 18. From this figure, we can see that when |∆Pd | < 8%, the dynamic equivalent
model can accurately reproduce the frequency dynamics of a grid with multiple induction
motors. However, when the grid load disturbance is too large (such as |∆Pd | = 10%), the
fidelity of the model is reduced. From this point of view, the proposed dynamic equivalent
model is more accurate in the case of small grid load disturbance.
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 20 of 23

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

Figure 18. Frequency dynamics of the IEEE 9-bus system and dynamic equivalent model under dif-
ferent load disturbance ∆Pd . (a) ∆Pd = −2%, (b) ∆Pd = −3%, (c) ∆Pd = −4%, (d) ∆Pd = −6%,
(e) ∆Pd = −8%, and (f) ∆Pd = −10%.

5. Conclusions
In this paper, the influence of induction motors on grid inertia are investigated. To do
so, in this paper, we propose two types of models, i.e., the detailed grid model and dynamic
equivalent model considering multiple induction motors. Specifically, a detailed grid
model with multiple induction motors is first established. However, the detailed model
requires the specific parameters of induction motors, which are hard to acquire in large
systems. Moreover, the accuracy of the model is unsatisfactory. To fill these gaps, a dynamic
equivalent model (DEM) is further proposed to emulate the detailed model. Compared
with the detailed model, the proposed dynamic equivalent model is structurally simple
and does not require the specific parameters of induction motors. Therefore, it is possible to
apply it to large systems to investigate the influence of induction motors on grid frequency
dynamics. To figure out the parameters of the proposed dynamic equivalent model from
historical frequency data, a genetic algorithm approach is introduced. The proposed models
are evaluated on the IEEE 9-bus system in MATLAB and SimPowerSystems toolbox, which
verifies their accuracy and effectiveness.
The key contributions of the paper are threefold.
• A detailed grid model incorporating multiple induction motors is established to
imitate the influence of induction motors on grid inertia.
• To address the limitations of the detailed grid model, a dynamic equivalent model
is further proposed. Compared with the detailed model, the proposed dynamic
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 21 of 23

equivalent model is structurally simple and does not require the specific parameters
of induction motors. So it is possible to be applied to large systems.
• A genetic algorithm-based approach is introduced to identify the parameters of the
dynamic equivalent model. Its optimality is guaranteed by an ad hoc approach.
In this work, all of the induction motors are assumed to work near the initial operation
point. Considering the random characteristics of induction motors, it is crucial to investigate
the effects of random motor start-up and shutdown events, which will be our future
research focus.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Z.T., G.M., and P.K.; methodology, Z.T., G.M., H.Y.,
J.P., P.K., M.M., and Z.Z.; software, Z.T., H.Y., M.M., and Z.Z.; validation, G.M., H.Y., and Z.X.;
investigation, Z.T., G.M., and P.K.; resources, H.Y., J.P., and Z.X.; writing—original draft preparation,
Z.Z.; writing—review and editing, Z.T., P.K., and M.M.; visualization, H.Y.; supervision, Z.T. and
G.M.; project administration, P.K.; funding acquisition, Z.T. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Science and Technology Project of State Grid Shanxi Electric
Power Research Institute.(Project name: Research on equivalent inertia and frequency response
characteristics of induction motors and applications of black-start scheme in power grid, Project
number: 52053022000J).
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. The parameters of the synchronous generators.

Parameters SG 1 SG 2 SG 3
Rated power Sn (MVA) 250 220 128
Line-to-line voltage V (kV) 16.5 18 13.8
Rated frequency f n (Hz) 50 50 50
Inertia coefficient H (s) 6 6 6
Stator resistance Rs (pu) 0.004 0.004 0.004
d axis reactance Xd , X 0 d , X 00 d (pu) 1.7, 0.27, 0.2 1.7, 0.27, 0.2 1.7, 0.27, 0.2
q axis reactance Xq , X 0 q , X 00 q (pu) 1.65, 0.47, 0.2 1.65, 0.47, 0.2 1.65, 0.47, 0.2

Table A2. The parameters of the constant loads, i.e., Load A, Load B, and Load C.

Parameters Load A Load B Load C

Rated active power Pn (MW) 125 90 100
Rated reactive power Qn (MVar) 50 30 35

Table A3. The parameters of the induction motors.

Parameters IM 1 IM 2 IM 3
Rated power Sn (MVA) 35 32 18
Rated frequency f n (Hz) 50 50 50
Stator resistance and inductance Rs , Ls (pu) 0.020, 0.040 0.014, 0.035 0.022, 0.043
Rotor resistance and inductance Rr , Lr (pu) 0.019, 0.040 0.017, 0.036 0.021, 0.042
Mechanical loads (pu) Tm = 0.5ωr + 0.5ωr2 Tm = 0.5 + 0.3ωr + 0.2ωr2 Tm = 1
constant-torque load,
constant-power load and
Mechanical loads type constant-power load and constant-torque load
pump load
pump load
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 22 of 23

Table A4. The parameters of the transformers.

Winding 1 Winding 2
Nominal Power Nominal
Location Parameters Parameters
(MVA) Frequency (Hz)
[R1(pu), L1(pu)] [R2(pu), L2(pu)]
Bus 1–Bus 4 250 50 [0, 0.15] [0, 0.15]
Bus 2–Bus 7 220 50 [0.15, 0] [0.15, 0.05]
Bus 3–Bus 9 150 50 [0, 0] [0, 0.15]

Table A5. The parameters of the transmission lines.

Resistances Inductances Capacitances

Location Length
(Ohms/km) (mH/km) (uF/km)
Bus 4–Bus 5 1 6.75 54.7 0.31
Bus 4–Bus 6 1 6.75 54.7 0.31
Bus 5–Bus 7 1 6.75 54.7 0.31
Bus 6–Bus 9 1 6.75 54.7 0.31
Bus 7–Bus 8 1 6.75 54.7 0.31
Bus 8–Bus 9 1 6.75 54.7 0.31

Table A6. The parameters of the constant loads, i.e., Load 1, Load 2, and Load 3.

Parameters Load 1 Load 2 Load 3

Rated active power Pn (MW) 35 32 18

References
1. Qi, J.; Liu, L.; Shen, Z.; Xu, B.; Leung, K.S.; Sun, Y. Low-carbon community adaptive energy management optimization toward
smart services. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2019, 16, 3587–3596. [CrossRef]
2. Alotaibi, I.; Abido, M.A.; Khalid, M.; Savkin, A.V. A comprehensive review of recent advances in smart grids: A sustainable
future with renewable energy resources. Energies 2020, 13, 6269. [CrossRef]
3. Kalantar-Neyestanaki, M.; Cherkaoui, R. Coordinating distributed energy resources and utility-scale battery energy storage
system for power flexibility provision under uncertainty. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2021, 12, 1853–1863. [CrossRef]
4. Muttaqi, K.M.; Islam, M.R.; Sutanto, D. Future power distribution grids: Integration of renewable energy, energy storage, electric
vehicles, superconductor, and magnetic bus. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2019, 29, 1–5. [CrossRef]
5. Zuo, K.; Wu, L. Enhanced Power and Energy Coordination for Batteries Under the Real-Time Closed-Loop, Distributed Microgrid
Control. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2022, 13, 2027–2040. [CrossRef]
6. Muttaqi, K.M.; Sutanto, D.; et al. Adaptive and predictive energy management strategy for real-time optimal power dispatch
from vpps integrated with renewable energy and energy storage. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2021, 57, 1958–1972.
7. Global Wind Energy Council. GWEC Global Wind Report 2022; Global Wind Energy Council: Brussels, Belgium, 2022.
8. Xiao, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, X. A modified intra-day market to trade updated forecast information for wind power integration.
IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2020, 12, 1044–1059. [CrossRef]
9. Worku, M.Y.; Hassan, M.A.; Abido, M.A. Real time energy management and control of renewable energy based microgrid in grid
connected and island modes. Energies 2019, 12, 276. [CrossRef]
10. Fjellstedt, C.; Ullah, M.I.; Forslund, J.; Jonasson, E.; Temiz, I.; Thomas, K. A Review of AC and DC Collection Grids for Offshore
Renewable Energy with a Qualitative Evaluation for Marine Energy Resources. Energies 2022, 15, 5816. [CrossRef]
11. Lunardi, A.; Normandia Lourenço, L.F.; Munkhchuluun, E.; Meegahapola, L.; Sguarezi Filho, A.J. Grid-Connected Power
Converters: An Overview of Control Strategies for Renewable Energy. Energies 2022, 15, 4151. [CrossRef]
12. Xue, S.M.; Liu, C. Line-to-line fault analysis and location in a VSC-based low-voltage DC distribution network. Energies 2018,
11, 536. [CrossRef]
13. Hu, Q.; Han, R.; Quan, X.; Wu, Z.; Tang, C.; Li, W.; Wang, W. Grid-forming inverter enabled virtual power plants with inertia
support capability. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2022, 13, 4134–4143. [CrossRef]
14. Li, C.; Yang, Y.; Cao, Y.; Aleshina, A.; Xu, J.; Blaabjerg, F. Grid inertia and damping support enabled by proposed virtual
inductance control for grid-forming virtual synchronous generator. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2022, 38, 294–303. [CrossRef]
15. Sockeel, N.; Gafford, J.; Papari, B.; Mazzola, M. Virtual inertia emulator-based model predictive control for grid frequency
regulation considering high penetration of inverter-based energy storage system. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2020, 11, 2932–2939.
[CrossRef]
Energies 2023, 16, 2987 23 of 23

16. Qi, Y.; Deng, H.; Liu, X.; Tang, Y. Synthetic inertia control of grid-connected inverter considering the synchronization dynamics.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2021, 37, 1411–1421. [CrossRef]
17. Björk, J.; Johansson, K.H.; Dörfler, F. Dynamic virtual power plant design for fast frequency reserves: Coordinating hydro and
wind. IEEE Trans. Control. Netw. Syst. 2022. [CrossRef]
18. Basak, R.; Bhuvaneswari, G.; Pillai, R.R. Low-voltage ride-through of a synchronous generator-based variable speed grid-
interfaced wind energy conversion system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 56, 752–762. [CrossRef]
19. Kabsha, M.; Rather, Z.H. A new control scheme for fast frequency support from HVDC connected offshore wind farm in
low-inertia system. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2019, 11, 1829–1837. [CrossRef]
20. Manaz, M.M.; Lu, C.N. Design of resonance damper for wind energy conversion system providing frequency support service to
low inertia power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2020, 35, 4297–4306. [CrossRef]
21. Zhou, T.; Liu, Z.; Ye, H.; Ren, B.; Xu, Y.; Liu, Y. Frequency response modeling and equivalent inertial estimation of induction
machine. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 554–564. [CrossRef]
22. Chen, L.; Wang, X.; Min, Y.; Li, G.; Wang, L.; Qi, J.; Xu, F. Modelling and investigating the impact of asynchronous inertia of
induction motor on power system frequency response. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2020, 117, 105708. [CrossRef]
23. Wang, D.; Yuan, X.; Zhang, M. Power-balancing based induction machine model for power system dynamic analysis in
electromechanical timescale. Energies 2018, 11, 438. [CrossRef]
24. Hu, Y.L.; Wu, Y.K. Inertial Response Identification Algorithm for the Development of Dynamic Equivalent Model of DFIG-Based
Wind Power Plant. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2021, 57, 2104–2113. [CrossRef]
25. Liu, Y.; Zhang, N.; Wang, Y.; Yang, J.; Kang, C. Data-driven power flow linearization: A regression approach. IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid 2018, 10, 2569–2580. [CrossRef]
26. Zheng, K.; Chen, Q.; Wang, Y.; Kang, C.; Xia, Q. A novel combined data-driven approach for electricity theft detection. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Inform. 2018, 15, 1809–1819. [CrossRef]
27. Jiang, T.; Mu, Y.; Jia, H.; Lu, N.; Yuan, H.; Yan, J.; Li, W. A novel dominant mode estimation method for analyzing inter-area
oscillation in China southern power grid. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2016, 7, 2549–2560. [CrossRef]
28. Anderson, P.M.; Mirheydar, M. A low-order system frequency response model. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 1990, 5, 720–729.
[CrossRef]
29. Ulbig, A.; Rinke, T.; Chatzivasileiadis, S.; Andersson, G. Predictive control for real-time frequency regulation and rotational
inertia provision in power systems. In Proceedings of the 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Firenze, Italy, 10–13
December 2013; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2013; pp. 2946–2953.
30. Zhang, Z.; Kou, P.; Zhang, Y.; Liang, D. Distributed model predictive control of all-dc offshore wind farm for short-term frequency
support. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2022, 14, 458–479. [CrossRef]

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