Hindawi

Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering

Volume 2020, Article ID 6275460, 8 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6275460

Review Article
A Survey on Microgrid Control Techniques in Islanded Mode

Uthpala N. Ekanayake and Uditha S. Navaratne

Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Peradeniya, 20400 Peradeniya, Sri Lanka

Correspondence should be addressed to Uthpala N. Ekanayake; [email protected]

Received 16 June 2020; Revised 21 September 2020; Accepted 28 September 2020; Published 15 October 2020

Academic Editor: Andrea Bonfiglio

Copyright © 2020 Uthpala N. Ekanayake and Uditha S. Navaratne. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.

Traditional power networks with generation in upstream and consumption in the downstream were controlled with centralized
controls like SCADA. However, in order to facilitate the penetration of distributed generation, the concept of microgrid was
popularized. A microgrid can operate both in grid-connected and in islanded modes. One of the challenges in the microgrid
environment is to provide both voltage control and maintain the system frequency while ensuring the stability of the network. This
paper is a literature survey focused on different microgrid control techniques with different levels of communication especially in
islanded operation.

1. Introduction provide energy management, while in islanded mode, the

objective is to control both its frequency and voltage, while
With the high penetration levels of renewable in the power supporting the energy demand. If there are no synchronous
network, the traditional centralized network posed many machines to balance demand and supply for island opera-
technical issues for maintaining stability and protection. tion, the inverter is responsible for providing these controls
Limited resources and high energy demand have resulted in especially the frequency control [2–4]. PQ (Active Power
many governments to set up policies to promote renewable and Reactive Power) control is the control strategy used in
energy. The energy generation which was limited to the top the grid-connected mode for power balance and it switches
level of the network hierarchy has now expanded to the to V/f (voltage frequency control), when the microgrid is in
distribution level with the increasing use of solar PV and islanded mode [2]. The most common approaches in grid
other renewable sources like wind. The control and moni- control architecture are centralized control and decentral-
toring once seen in the generation and transmission have ized control architectures. The centralized control approach
now become a must, even at the distribution. The concept of is widely used in traditional power networks mainly at the
microgrids has facilitated the integration of renewable re- generation level with Supervisory Control Data Acquisition
sources at this level. A microgrid is a small-scale distribution (SCADA) systems [5]. Here, the control operation is
network containing a set of distributed generations (DGs) planned beforehand and is implemented. With distributed
designed to supply electrical power to a local area (LA), generation, decentralized control architectures became
connected to a large network (host grid) as a single con- popular.
trollable entity [1]. Microgrids became popular because of
their ability to work in isolation. 2. Centralized Control
A microgrid operation can be in two modes. When the
microgrid fulfills its energy demand by the main grid, it is A central controller is used with distributed sensors, actu-
called grid-connected mode and when demand is supplied ators, local controllers, and supporting communication
from its own local generation, it is called islanded mode. In network. Data collected from the distributed sensors are sent
grid-connected mode, the main objective of a controller is to to the centralized control via a communication network.
2 Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering

Once the central controller gathers data, it calculates the controller has different control layers to coordinate the
control variable for each control equipment and sends them control process. While the upper layers manage the objec-
back to the local controllers [4, 5]. Local controls never tives globally by providing control set points, the lower
perform decision-making and all the decisions are made at layers perform the controlling. In a multilevel concept,
the central controller. This is illustrated in Figure 1. Here, the control is introduced into local controllers (LCs) and their
abbreviation LA corresponds to the local area controller and action is coordinated by an additional unit MCC (Microgrid
CC to the central controller. Central Control) with the Main Grid Central Controller. A
hierarchical control-based control architecture is illustrated
3. Decentralized Control in Figure 3 [6].
The control levels in the hierarchy are illustrated in
In a decentralized control approach, the distribution system Figure 4 [10]. It is necessary to ensure the control from one
is divided into small networks called microgrids. A level to the lower levels and the communication bandwidth
microgrid can have a few local area (LA) networks and its of the hierarchical control is decreased with an increase in
own controller. In a fully decentralized approach, each unit control level.
(DER) in a microgrid is controlled by its local controller The main purpose of the primary level controller is to
(LC) [4–6]. An LC supervises a set of LAs that require no provide direct control to the electronic converters to
communication between LAs. When the LCs communicate maintain voltage and frequency; the secondary level is
to find a common solution for the overall control problem, responsible to establish coordination among the neigh-
the control architecture is called distributed. boring local controllers and mitigate voltage/frequency
Islanded microgrid operation is challenging due to the deviations caused at the primary control level. In the third
intermittent nature of renewable energy generation. They level and the highest level, the controller takes all the
create uncertainties in maintaining a stable voltage and uncertainties of the power network to determine the op-
frequency output. Hence, this shows the requirement of an timal power flow ensuring demand/generation balance
accurate load forecasting and load management system with [10, 11].
a decentralized nature. However, a fully decentralized ap-
proach is not possible as it requires strong coordination
between the LCs. 5.1. Primary Control. Primary control is the first level in the
hierarchy dealing with the local controllers. They require a
4. Distributed Control fast response with minimum or no communication to
control problems in the power network. The primary pur-
Decentralized and distributed control operates on the same pose is islanding detection and voltage/frequency control
principle except that distributed architecture has commu- [6–11]. Primary control can be categorized into master/slave
nication with local networks (LAs) and LCs. A distributed control and distributed control which requires communi-
control scheme is illustrated in Figure 2. cation links to be established and other categories of droop
Distributed controls assign control tasks to different DGs controls which require no communication. Since master/
and their interaction. These control tasks are based on slave control requires communication channels with higher
different time frame operations and they constitute a control bandwidths and it reduces the reliability in case of failure of a
hierarchy. In a network, when the number of units increases, single point of the network, the widely adapted method is
distributed control is challenging unless a control hierarchy droop control [12]. Primary control is performed by Voltage
is established. This approach is used for the coordination of Source Inverter (VSI) controllers.
each unit. This will be discussed further in the next section. The inverter that interfaces the DERs to the grid works in
The distributed techniques aim to address an underlying two ways. It works in Power Control Mode (PCM) when
optimization problem in a distributed manner with limited operating in grid-connected mode and Voltage Control
communication [7–9]. Mode (VCM) when operating in islanded mode [4]. VCM
Distributed control strategies include model predictive control is used to regulate the output of the VSI where droop
control-based techniques, consensus-based techniques, and characteristics are used to control voltage and frequency.
agent-based techniques, which will be discussed in later The droop controls are described using equations (1) and (2)
sections. The recent interest in research of distributed as follows:
control strategies shows microgrid island operation and
ω � ω0 − Kp ∗ Pg, (1)
control together with preserving privacy and protecting the
system from cyberattacks [7].
V � V0 − Kq ∗ Qg, (2)
5. Hierarchical Control
where ω and V are the new steady-state frequency and
The hierarchical control system has two concepts, namely, voltage values, respectively, ω0 and V0 are the base fre-
multilayer and multilevel. In a multilayer concept, the quency and voltage values fixed when operating in grid-
control is split into layers and each acts at different time connected mode, Kp and Kq are the active power and re-
intervals. A hierarchical control scheme consists of three active power static droop gains, and Pg and Qg are the three-
levels of control: primary, secondary, and tertiary [6, 7]. The phase injected active power and reactive power.
Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering 3

LA1 LA2 LA3

LA5 CC LA4
Tertiary control
Data and command flow
Power flow control
Figure 1: Centralized control architecture. All local area networks
or microgrids in the main network are controlled by a centralized
controller. Secondary control

Regulating small deviations

of voltage and frequency
due to primary control
Microgrid 1 Microgrid 2
Primary control
LA1 LC1 LA1
Regulating individual voltage
LA2 LA2 and frequency outputs of DGs

LA3 LC2 LA3

Figure 4: Representation of control hierarchy [10].

Data and commands flow

According to equation (3), the connection impedance to
Figure 2: Distributed control architecture. A controller is assigned
to each microgrid that can communicate with each other. the PCC affects the correctness of reactive power sharing.
Apart from this, the reactive power setpoint in droop
controls from an energy management system (EMS) and the
increase in load demand also affects the reactive power
sharing.
Microgrid Nondroop methods such as described in [13] use power-
Microgrid control 1
control 2
sharing methods. A decentralized servomechanism con-
LA1 LC1 troller at each DG unit adjusts its voltage independently.
LA2 MCC Central Power sharing is achieved using an internal oscillator that
LA3 controller extracts the phase angle and transmits it to DGs. However,
LC2 this type of method is difficult to implement in larger
Microgrid
control 3 systems.
Recent developments include the modeling of the in-
Main grid verter as a virtual generator. Its goal is to mimic the con-
ventional synchronous machine dynamics to improve
Data/command flow voltage and frequency stability [14, 15].
Reference [14] describes a Synchronverter that mimics
Figure 3: Hierarchical control architecture. MCC coordinates the the behavior of a synchronous generator employed with
actions of LCs with a main grid. modifications to the software without changing the hard-
ware. These modifications can include virtually controlling
Droop control realizes active power with droop char- the field current, so that it delivers a better way of computing
acteristics to improve the frequency and reactive power to reactive power, increasing the size of filter inductors to make
improve the output voltage of the DG units. However, there the inverter more robust towards small voltage violations,
are disadvantages involved in droop controls. They are poor virtually changing the nominal active mechanical torque,
in voltage regulation and have high voltage distortion, a and introducing virtual capacitors to eliminate the influence
probability of a loss of synchronism when resynchronizing from DC voltages.
with the main grid [2] and most importantly poor reactive Reference [15] describes a comprehensive inverter-
power sharing among the DERs. Droop control guarantees BESS-based primary control. The control of this system can
the stability of frequency and correct active power sharing. regulate frequency and voltage in microgrid islands in VCM
However, it produces errors in reactive power sharing. This mode, independently of the number of parallel operations of
is highlighted through grid parameters relevant to the other DERs, with the adaptation of a virtual generator. This
regulation problem in [12]. If Q′i is the reactive power de- technique includes an automatic voltage regulator and a
livered to the Point of Common Coupling (PCC) and V is rotor flux model which models the reactive power/voltage
the voltage at PCC, then magnitude similar to that of a synchronous generator
through machine flux variation as in equation (4) and an
Vi − V
Q′i � 􏼒 􏼓V. (3) inertia model and a frequency governor that makes the
Xi system similar to a synchronous generator active power/
4 Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering

frequency dynamics through virtual mechanical dynamic as An optimal operation is sought in secondary control,
in equation (5): also referred to as the energy management of a microgrid,
dvref through the implementation of multiagent systems where
� ki QAvR − Q􏼁, (4) individual DER units are controlled by local agents.
dt

dωref
� K􏼐Pgov − P − kd ωref 􏼑. (5) 5.3. Tertiary Control. Tertiary control is the highest and the
dt lowest level of control for grid-connected microgrids op-
vref is the initial voltage variation, ki is rotor flux model gain erating in hierarchical control schemes. It sets long-term set
which is modeled as an integrator, and QAVR and Q are points to operate for DER units. Moreover, it is responsible
reactive power at the output of the AVR and the inverter, for managing multiple microgrids in a host network [2–4].
respectively. ωref is the rotational speed of the virtual gen- This control level applies to the operation and managing
erator, K is inertial model gain, kd is the damping effect, and power flow between the microgrid and the main grid. In
Pgov and P are the active power at the output of the governor islanded mode, tertiary control gets disabled. Hence, it is not
and the inverter, respectively. discussed in detail in this survey.
Secondary control level is used to mitigate the problems
aroused in the primary control. 6. Agent-Based Techniques for
Distributed Control
5.2. Secondary Control. Secondary control is required in Energy management systems with intelligent decisions and
both grid-connected and in islanded modes. However, the adaptive feedback have complex behaviors. Hence, multi-
latter is challenging due to the uncertainties of generation in agent applications became popular in this domain. A
DGs and the update rate of load dispatch commands [3, 4]. multiagent system decomposes a complex problem into
The main objective at this level hence includes finding the subproblems. The subproblem decisions are then taken by
optimal dispatch of all DERs and restoring the voltage and an agent attempting to achieve a certain objective. An agent
frequency deviations produced at the primary control. Real- could be any DER, a load, a transformer, or any other device
time optimization is required at this level for economic or any entity in the network [20–22]. In islanded operation, a
dispatch and unit commitment. multiagent system will control DER units based on the
Secondary control is the highest hierarchical level in information exchanged by the agents through a local con-
islanded microgrids [3, 4]. This control operates in a slower troller. They perform negotiations and energy trading to
time frame than the primary control reducing the com- meet load demands [20–22]. The control and communi-
munication bandwidth used by the microgrid variables. cation architecture of these agents could be in centralized,
Hence, it allows the performance of more complex calcu- distributed, or hierarchical control. While the agents in local
lations. The secondary control level can be centralized or areas are responsible for communicating with each other to
distributed. In centralized secondary control, MCC manages solve the control issues locally, there can be coordination
power flow and provides reference values for primary with a communicative agent among them. This is illustrated
control. After gathering data, it determines the deviations in Figure 5.
and decides the secondary control action [16]. However, this Centralized agent architecture consists of agents man-
approach is highly dependent on communication and is aged by a single controller in a master-slave relationship
more expensive and unreliable. Recent developments show [22]. Distributed agent architecture consists of several agents
distributed control approaches at this level to reduce allowed to discover global information through communi-
communication. cation with their neighbors. Hierarchical agent consists of
In literature, [17] presents a distributed secondary control different layers of agents whose communication is achieved
(DSC) scheme for inverters in a network with uncertain via a layered architecture. The information flow is from
communication links. The discrete-time DSC controllers use lower layers to higher layers, whereas the control flow is
an iterative learning mechanism that enables the DERs in the from higher layers to lower layers. Besides information flow
microgrid to achieve voltage/frequency restoration and active in layers, different agents in the same layer may also be able
power sharing. Here, the secondary control inputs are to communicate with each other.
updated at the end of an iteration round; thus, DERs only
need to share data with its neighbors in low bandwidth.
The secondary controllers are not necessary to be fre- 6.1. Centralized Agent Architecture. Here, a collection of
quently operated. Hence, [18] suggests an event-triggered nonintelligent agents is managed by a central controller in a
approach. The controller is updated only when a local master-slave approach. As described in [22], the agents are
measurement error exceeds a certain boundary, thereby categorized into two classes: reactive and cognitive. The
limiting the communication. Because of the existence of central controller is a cognitive agent with intelligence re-
communication noise among DGs, [19] describes a fully sponsible for communicating with nonautonomous reactive
distributed noise-resilient secondary voltage control ap- agents to establish the desired control plan like managing
proach to select a proper set of control inputs for voltage and and disconnecting noncritical loads. A diagram in Figure 6
frequency restoration. describes these two classes of agents.
Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering 5

Microgrid Reactive Reactive

agent agent
LA1
LA2
Cognitive
MCC agent

LA3 Reactive Reactive

LA4 agent agent

Figure 6: Centralized multiagent architecture. This diagram shows

Data/command flow between local networks the two types of agents who are responsible for communicating in
Data/command flow through a controller control architecture, the same as in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Distributed control with agents. This diagram illustrates
the data and command flow between the local areas through agents these agents require some sort of intelligence making the
as well as how the commands are centralized using a microgrid microgrid autonomous.
controller. Over the past few years, extensive research has been
conducted on multiagent systems (MAS). MAS-based en-
6.2. Distributed Agent Architecture. Here, a collection of ergy management system (EMS) architectures have been
agents is handled by a single layer control structure instead widely used for distributed control and demand-side energy
of hierarchical layers. The agents are intelligent and au- management in microgrids. Literature [23] presents a MAS-
tonomous and responsible for managing a local area in the decentralized EMS that employs fuzzy cognitive maps for
network. These agents can discover global information energy management, [21] presents an outage management
through communication and coordination with their system using MAS, and in [24], microgrid local controllers
neighboring agents [22]. are assigned to some specific agents to interact with each
other to achieve a common decision in the restoration of
voltage. All these studies demonstrate the beneficial appli-
6.3. Hierarchical Agent Architecture. In this architecture, cation of MAS in microgrids, where the players/agents were
agents have different authorities over the control actions. cooperating and various decision-making methods and
While some agents have more authority to sense and manage control strategies were used to attain the optimal microgrid
over the others. Typically, the upper layer/level agents are performance using techniques like Particle Swarm Opti-
responsible for handling a large amount of data and mization, game theory, and generic algorithms.
maintaining the communication schedules for demand/
generation balance. The middle layer/level agents are re-
sponsible for making decisions, switching between grid
8. Model Predictive Control
connection and islanded modes, minimizing the energy In the future microgrid, a control hierarchy with multiagent
losses, and directing the necessary actions for neighboring will be coordinated by a centralized optimization problem to
agents, in identifying faults and restoring power. The lower fulfill a control goal. These control strategies can be cate-
layer/level agents are responsible for interacting with sensors gorized to direct control and indirect control. A direct
in the microgrid. Sensors are responsible for sensing and control has a two-way communication for accessing the
controlling the grid breakers, DGs, battery energy storage DERs, then communicating back the control strategy, and
devices (BESS), and controllable loads [22]. getting feedback. On the other hand, indirect control needs
only one way to initialize DER control. This is where the
7. Peer-to-Peer Communication model predictive control (MPC) strategies come into play.
MPC can predict the next control sequence along with a
Peer-to-peer communication is considered a technique that control action (e.g., variation in output of a DER).
can be used in multiagent systems. Each agent requires a Extending MPC to multiagents involves knowing the
measurement of its own and its nearest neighbor and re- subsystem model of a control agent in advance. However, a
quires a very low bandwidth for this communication [16]. control agent has no global information but can access only
Here, all the agents have the same priority and the im- local information. Therefore, predictions are important
portance of communicating in a peer-to-peer fashion [6]. about the future evolution of external variables of neighbors.
Algorithms used for P2P communication between the agents However, when the horizon becomes longer, the accuracy
include gossiping and consensus algorithms. Gossip algo- can get lost. Research work suggests that this could be
rithms can be used for voltage and frequency control at the mitigated by assuming a constant value over the whole
secondary level. horizon based on a local measurement or obtained from a
These algorithms aim at sharing data quickly in the neighboring agent. It is also possible that assuming pre-
network [6]. To facilitate the absence of a central controller, dictions over the whole horizon or assuming a model that
6 Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering

d
Disturbance u y
Model
Optimizer
r x = Ax + Bu
Reference y = Cx + Du
y
Figure 7: Model predictive control diagram.

predicts the values of the external variables based on the Microgrid (SPM) testbed facility at the University of Genoa,
dynamics of neighboring subsystems. [25]. Italy.
The MPC diagram is illustrated in Figure 7. In [29], the approach focuses on solving optimization
The commonly used MPC strategy is called Distributed problems of MPC with an analytical optimal solution for
Model Predictive Control (DMPC). In this discrete time, unconstrained mode and near-optimal solution in a tran-
control methodology, an optimal controller, is developed sient state. It gives an output with a fixed switching fre-
based on the dynamic system model and forecasting. The quency, increases robustness under system parameter
MPC control objective is a real-time optimization problem uncertainties and variations, and gives a fast-dynamic
and is repeatedly computed for all control inputs. The op- response.
timization problem can be based on minimizing costs or
forcing the system to follow predefined control set points
based on a prior state estimation. Literature in [26, 27]
9. Consensus-Based Technique
describes different objective functions, based on traditional In consensus-based techniques, a distributed optimization
linear quadratic regulators, economic objectives, and a problem is solved to converge DER operating set points to a
combination of both. single value. In [30, 31], consensus-based multiagent
The MPC scheme has been used to derive linearized schemes are used for load restoration, fault recovery, and
models for voltage control in [27]. It predicts the voltage frequency control. The literature in [30] describes a dis-
profile in the next time step and adjusts the voltage and tributed voltage secondary control (DVSC) strategy using a
reactive power set points accordingly, to achieve a smooth dynamic consensus protocol. Here, a voltage correction is
voltage profile in the next step. Equation (6) is the objective provided to droop control units using consensus-based
function, as given in [27], based on optimizing the gener- protocol. As shown in Figure 9, to regulate the voltage at a
ation cost of a microgrid operating in islanded operation: node i, the responsible agent has a controller that uses a
k+N−1 dynamic consensus estimate given by equation (8):
⎝C (t) + 􏽘 C (t)⎞
min F(U, k) � 􏽘 ⎛ ⎠, (6) N
g m
t�k t�m V_ e (t) � 􏽘 aij 􏼐Vj (t) − Ve (t)􏼑 + Vi . (8)
j�1
where Cg (t) is the generation cost from the main grid Here, Vi is the measured voltage at node i, Ve is the
proportional to power demand, Cm (t) is the cost of the mth estimate of the average voltages provided at node I, and Vj is
conventional distributed generator in the microgrid, and U the voltage estimate received by the neighboring node j. The
is a vector containing control actions in the entire control estimated voltage is then compared with a reference
horizon given by equation (7): microgrid voltage and the error is fed into a PI controller.
T Since the consensus control is dependent on the degree of
U(t) � 􏽨uT (k) uT (k + 1) · · · uT (k + N − 1)􏽩 . (7) connectivity between its agents, different communication
topology exists between the DERs. The daisy chain topology,
Here, for any single time step, the control signal U(t) loop communication topology, and star topology are some
includes power outputs of all controllable generators as well of these examples.
as energy storage. The principle of defining the consensus method is based
MPC is a type of dynamic control that requires a quick on equation (8) and two theories. Here, aij is the element of
response. This is illustrated in Figure 8 with other control the adjacency matrix of the graph and V is the graph nodes
strategies. DMPC and the coordination between the local in graph theory. These graph nodes must satisfy the principle
controllers can be again categorized into distributed and of distributed consensus. The first theory says that the graph
hierarchical communication. consists of a spanning tree (a subset of a graph which has all
MPC is also used for inverter controls [28, 29] as a the vertices covered with a minimum possible number of
primary level control technique. Literature in [28] has used edges) causing a consensus control and all eigenvalues have
this technique for decentralized primary control of an zero or positive parts. The second theory is that if a graph
islanded microgrid (MG) composed only by power con- consists of a spanning tree, all agents’ states will converge to
verters and without any rotating electrical machine and was the external control signal. These are the fundamentals used
tested to an islanded portion of the Smart Polygeneration in consensus control [32].
Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering 7

Disturbances

Planning/ Basic control,

Dynamic control,
maintenance Optimization for example, Plant
for example,
and scheduling PI/PID control
MPC

Yearly Daily Within minutes Within seconds Time

Figure 8: A control hierarchy with respect to a timeline. This diagram illustrates when and where MPC which is a dynamic control is placed
in a control hierarchy.

vi
Agent
vj ve
+
– aij I
— ++
s

Communication path with neighboring agents

Figure 9: Consensus-based control diagram. This diagram shows how consensus-based algorithm is used for voltage regulation.

Distributed generation can be physically placed in widely subsystems, these predictions by their respective agents,
spanned locations. The consensus-based method can bring communication between the neighboring agents must be
these generators to a global agreement of a parameter using accurate enough to improve the decision-making process.
only communication among neighbors [31]. However, what information to be communicated, and when
to decide on the control action are still some open research
in this area. In the case of frequency restoration, the dis-
10. Conclusions tributed consensus-based control algorithms have demon-
The literature survey describes the techniques used for strated more accuracy. From all the mentioned algorithms,
microgrid control and communication giving relevance to the consensus-based control used with an agent-based
the islanded mode operation. Islanded microgrid controls scheme requires the least communication resources and has
are responsible for making decisions on maintaining power the fastest convergence time that suits the microgrid sec-
balance and providing voltage and frequency control. This ondary control in restoring variations in voltage and fre-
includes the equilibrium, supply surplus, and the supply quency during islanded operation.
shortage. Droop controls can maintain discrepancies in
voltage and frequency. However, they still can deviate from Data Availability
their reference values. Recent developments include a
The data used to support the findings of this paper are
nondroop control technique at the primary level where the
included within the article.
inverters mimic the conventional synchronous machine
dynamics. Additional control levels are introduced as sec-
ondary controls in islanded microgrids to mitigate the de- Conflicts of Interest
viations at the primary level. While the traditional secondary The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest
control methods include a centralized structure, the recently regarding the publication of this paper.
developing concepts focus more on distributed control
structures. Instead of gathering global information, these
References
controls can use local data collected from neighbors. One of
the challenges in distributed control is ensuring that local [1] K. V. Vidyanandan and B. Kamath, “Grid integration of
control actions are consistent with the action of others. renewables: challenges and solutions,” in Emerging Energy
Agent-based techniques are popularized which can use Scenario in India-Issues, Challenges and Way Forward Ney-
peer-to-peer communication strategies as intelligent agents, veli, Tamil Nadu, India, 2018.
attempting to achieve an objective using neighboring data. [2] O. Palizban and K. Kauhaniemi, Microgrid Control Principles
In a multiagent setting where DMPC has employed, each in Island Mode Operation, PowerTech, Grenoble, France,
2013.
control agent makes a prediction of its subsystem over a
[3] K. C. Soni and F. F. Belim, “MicroGrid during grid-connected
horizon from local data. Due to the constraints of other mode and islanded mode-A review,” International Journal of
8 Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering

Advanced Engineering and Research Development, vol. 20, [20] H.-M. Kim, T. Kinoshita, and M.-C. Shin, “A multiagent
pp. 2348–4470, 2016. system for autonomous operation of islanded microgrids
[4] P. Borazjani, N. I. A. Wahab, H. B. Hizam et al., “A review on based on a power market environment,” Energies, vol. 3,
microgrid control techniques,” IEEE Innovative Smart Grid no. 12, pp. 1972–1990, 2010.
Technologies-Asia (ISGT ASIA), vol. 2014, pp. 749–753, 2014. [21] R. Leo, A. A. Morais, R. Rathnakumar et al., “Micro-grid grid
[5] D. E. Olivares, A. Mehrizi-Sani, A. H. Etemadi et al., “Trends outage management using multi agent systems,” in Pro-
in microgrid control,” IEEE-PES Task Force on Microgrid ceedings of the 2 nd International Conference on Recent Trends
Control, vol. 14, 2014. and Challenges in Computational Models, Tindivanam, India,
[6] A. Shreshtha, B. P. Hayes, and R. Bishwokarma, “Peer-to-peer February 2017.
energy trading in micro/mini-grids for local energy com- [22] A. Kantamnenia, L. E. Browna, G. Parkerb et al., “Survey of
munities,” A Review and Case Study of the Nepalese Electricity multi-agent systems for microgrid control,” Engineering
System, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 131911–131928, 2019. Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 44, 2015.
[7] M. Yazdanian and A. Mehrizi-Sani, “Distributed control [23] C. Karavas, K. Arvanitis, and G. Papadakis, “A game theory
techniques in microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, approach to multi-agent decentralized energy management of
vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 2901–2909, 2014. autonomous polygeneration microgrids,” 2017.
[8] H. Almasalma, J. Engels, and G. Deconinck, “Peer-to-peer [24] E. Rokrok, M. Shafie-khan, P. Siano, and J. P. S. Catalao, “A
control of microgrids,” in Proceedings of the Young Re- decentralized multi-agent based approach for low voltage
searchers Symposium, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 2016. microgrid restoration,” Energies, vol. 22, 2017.
[9] Z. A. Obaid, L. M. Cipcigan, L. Abrahim et al., “Frequency [25] R. R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, and H. Hellendoorn, “Multi-
control of future power systems:reviewing and evaluating agent model predictive control of transportation networks,”
challenges and new control methods,” Journal Modern Power in Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on
Sytems and Clean Energy, vol. 8, 2019. Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC 2006), pp. 296–301,
[10] N. Yusof1 and Z. Ali, “Review of active synchronization for Lauderdale, FL, USA, April 2006.
renewable powered microgrid”,” International Journal of [26] R. Halvgaard, “Model predictive control for smart energy
Engineering & Technology, vol. 8, no. 17, pp. 14–21, 2019. systems,” Technical University of Denmark Department of
[11] L. Meng, Hierarchical control for optimal and distributed Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, vol. 23, 2017.
operation of microgrid systems, Ph.D. thesis, Aalborg Uni- [27] J. Ma, F. Yang, Z. Li, and S. Joe Qin, “A renewable energy
versity, Denmark, Europe, 2015. integration application in a microgrid based on model pre-
[12] A. Rosini, M. Minetti, G. B. Denegri, and M. Invernizzi, dictive control,” IEEE Power and Energy Society General
“Reactive power sharing analysis in islanded AC microgrids,” Meeting, vol. 23, pp. 22–26, 2012.
in Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on [28] F. Blanco, A. Labella, D. Mestriner, and A. Rosini, “Model
Environment and Electrical Engineering and 2019 IEEE In- Predictive Control for Primary Regulation of Islanded
dustrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC/ Microgrid,” in Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International
I&CPS Europe), IEEE, Genoa, Italy, pp. 1–6, September 2019. Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering and
[13] R. Moradi, H. Karimi, and M. Karimi-Ghartemani, “Robust 2018 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe
decentralized control for islanded operation of two radially (EEEIC/I&CPS Europe), IEEE, Denmark, Europe, pp. 1–6,
connected DG systems,” in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE June 2018.
International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE), [29] H. T. Nguyen, E.-K. Kim, I.-P. Kim, H. H. Choi, and
London, UK, July 2010. J.-W. Jung, “Model predictive control with modulated optimal
[14] V. Natarajan and G. Weiss, “Synchronverters with better vector for a three-phase inverter with an LC filter,” IEEE
stability due to virtual inductors, virtual capacitors, and anti- Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 2690–
windup,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 64, 2703, 2018.
no. 7, pp. 5994–6004, 2017. [30] Q. Shafiee, T. Dragicevic, F. Andrade, J. C. Vasquez, and
[15] M. Fusero, A. Tuckey, A. Rosini, P. Serra, R. Procopio, and J. M. Guerrero, “Distributed consensus-based control of
A. Bonfiglio, “A comprehensive inverter-BESS primary multiple DC-microgrids clusters,” in Proceedings of the 2014
control for AC microgrids,” Energies, vol. 12, p. 381, 2019. 40th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics
[16] P. Singh, P. Paliwal, and A. Arya, “A review on challenges and Society IECON, Singapore, February 2015.
techniques for secondary control of microgrid”,” IOP Con- [31] S. Ahmed Fuad, “Consensus based distributed control in
ference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 561, microgrid consensus based distributed control in micro-grid
Article ID 012075, 2019. clusters clusters,” Master Thesis, Michigan Technological
[17] X. Lu, X. Yu, J. Lai, J. M. Guerrero, and H. Zhou, “Distributed University, Houghton, Michigan, 2017.
secondary voltage and frequency control for islanded [32] F. Aghaee, N. M. Dehkordi, N. Bayati, and A. Hajizadeh,
microgrids with uncertain communication links,” IEEE “Distributed control methods and impact of communication
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 13, no. 2, failure in ac microgrids: a comparative review,” Electronics,
pp. 448–460, 2017. vol. 8, no. 11, p. 1265, 2019.
[18] Y. Wang, T. L. Nguyen, Y. Xu, Z. Li, Q.-T. Tran, and R. Caire,
“Cyber-physical design and implementation of distributed
event-triggered secondary control in islanded microgrids,”
IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol. 55, no. 6,
pp. 5631–5642, 2019.
[19] N. M. Dehkordi, H. R. Baghaee, N. Sadati, and J. M. Guerrero,
“Distributed noise-resilient secondary voltage and frequency
control for islanded microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 3780–3790, 2019.