IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 64, NO.
7, JULY 2017 5907
Power-Electronics-Enabled Autonomous Power
Systems: Architecture and Technical Routes
Qing-Chang Zhong, Fellow, IEEE
AbstractPower systems are going through a paradigm
change from centralized generation to distributed genera-
tion and further on to smart grids. In this paper, it is shown
that future power systems will be power electronics based,
instead of electric machines based, with a huge number of
incompatible players and that the fundamental challenge
behind this paradigm change is how to make sure these
players could work together and maintain system stability.
Then, a lateral architecture based on the synchronization
mechanism of synchronous machines (SM), which has un-
derpinned the growth and operation of power systems for
over 100 years, is proposed to unify the integration and in-
teraction of these players with the grid by operating power
electronic converters to behave like virtual synchronous
machines (VSM), which are coined cyber synchronous ma-
chines (CSM) here. Thus, all the suppliers and the major-
ity of loads can follow the same mechanism to regulate
system stability. This paves the way for autonomous op-
eration of future power systems. Moreover, two technical
routes, one based on the synchronverter technology and the
other based on the robust droop control technology, are pro-
posed to implement the architecture. Real-time simulation
results are presented to illustrate the operation of such a
system.
Index TermsControl, cyber synchronous machines
(CSM), distributed energy resources (DER), grid archi-
tecture, phase-locked loops (PLL), power electronics,
power systems, renewable energy, robust droop control,
self-synchronization, smart grid, synchronverter, universal
droop control, virtual synchronous machines (VSM).
I. INTRODUCTION
N CURRENT power systems, the generation of electricity
I is dominated by centralized large facilities. For example,
the lions share of electricity in China is provided by just 1500
or so generators rated at 200 MW and above. It is relatively
easy to regulate a limited number of generators in a power sys-
tem to achieve system stability and meet the balance between
generation and demand. Due to civilization and economic de-
velopment, the demand for electricity is constantly growing,
leading directly to supply issues and environmental crisis. The
Manuscript received September 16, 2016; revised December 4, 2016
and January 5, 2017; accepted January 30, 2017. Date of publication
March 2, 2017; date of current version June 9, 2017.
The author is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL 60616 USA (e-mail:
zhongqc@ieee.org).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2017.2677339
0278-0046 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
large-scale utilization of distributed energy resources (DER),
including renewables, electric vehicles, and energy storage sys-
tems, is regarded as a promising means for lessening these
problems [1] and, as a result, power systems are going through
a paradigm change from centralized generation to distributed
generation. Adding a communication and information network
into power systems, hence the birth of smart grids, would help
make power systems more efficient, more resilient to threats,
and friendlier to the environment [2]. Naturally, the added com-
munication network is expected to provide the infrastructure
needed for all power system players to work together, even at
the low-level controls. This standard scenario, however, could
lead to serious concerns about reliability [3], [4]. If the com-
munication network breaks down then the whole power system
could crash. Moreover, when the number of players reaches
a certain level, how to manage the communication network is
itself a challenge.
When a large number of DER are integrated into a power
system, the number of players on the supply side will increase
considerably. Moreover, a lot of players on the demand side are
expected to actively take part in the system regulation as well.
Hence, the total number of active players in a power system
could easily reach millions, hundreds of millions or even bil-
lions. How to integrate all these players so that they are able to
work together to maintain the system stability is a great chal-
lenge [5]. The intergrid proposed in [6] adopts the hierarchical
nanogridmicrogrid ... grid structure to achieve dynamic
decoupling of generation, distribution, and consumption by us-
ing bidirectional power electronic converters as energy control
centers. The integrated grid [7] is proposed to integrate DER in
the planning and operation of the grid and to expand its scope
to include DER operation. An integrated smart grid system is
proposed in [8] to advocate a synergy of computing and phys-
ical resources and envision a trustworthy middle-ware provid-
ing services to grid applications through message passing and
transactions. The FREEDM system envisions to operate power
systems as Energy Internet or Internet of Energy [9]. The
constant seeking for an underlying principle is ongoing.
What is equally important is the integration and interaction
of loads. At the moment, most loads do not actively contribute
to the regulation of system stability. In recent years, demand
response has become an active research area to empower some
loads to take part in the regulation [10]. However, these are
done on the on/off basis. It would be much better if the majority
of loads are able to take part in the system regulation in a
continuous way, like generators.
5908 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 64, NO. 7, JULY 2017

Similar trend is also happening in shipboard power systems

[11], vehicular power systems [12], and aircraft power systems
[13], where more and more power electronic converters are
being added into these smaller scale power systems. A simple
mechanism that is able to govern the stability of power systems
at different scales is demanded.
Since the public power system is already the largest man-
made machine in the world [14], it is not feasible to rebuild
power systems from the scratch. The ultimate solution is to
tame the power electronic converters-interfaced supplies and
loads so that they can follow the major principles of the current
power systems. It is well known that synchronous machines
(SM) can synchronize with each other or with the power sup-
ply autonomously, without the need of external communication.
This has underpinned the organic growth and operation of power Fig. 1. Estimates of U.S. energy consumption by end-use sector
systems for over 100 years. In this paper, the architecture that (19492010) [15].
is able to continue adopting the synchronization mechanism of
SM is proposed for future power systems to unify the integra-
tion and interaction of all generators and the majority of loads.
This allows all active players to communicate with each other at
the low level of the power system without relying on a commu-
nication network. The function of communication is achieved
through control, that is to say, the measurement of local volt-
age or frequency and the execution of control algorithms, based
on the underlying synchronization mechanism of SM. As a re- Fig. 2. Estimated electricity consumption in USA.
sult, the communication system in a smart grid can be released
from low-level controls and adopted to focus on high-level func-
tions, e.g., information monitoring and management, electricity
Conference, ACC 2015, the 2014 Chinese Control and Deci-
market, etc. This architecture simply turns all suppliesboth
sion Conference, IEEE IECON 2014, IEEE GreenTech 2014,
conventional and DERand the majority of loads into virtual
and IEEE PEDG 2013, and distinguished lectures sponsored by
SM (VSM). They can work together autonomously and make
the IEEE Control Systems Society and IEEE Power Electronics
contributions to maintain system stability, leading to the au-
Society.
tonomous operation of power systems. Moreover, two technical
routes are presented to implement the architecture, one based on
the synchronverter technology and the other based on the robust II. FUNDAMENTAL CHALLENGE BEING FACED BY
droop control technology. POWER SYSTEMS
It is worth emphasizing that operating power converters as As shown in Fig. 1, the electricity consumption in USA has
VSM does not mean to mimic conventional SM exactly, e.g., to been constantly increasing in the last 60 years. More and more
have slow responses because of large inertia, but to mimic the different types of loads are being added to power systems. Ac-
fundamental synchronization mechanism of SM while maximiz- cording to the US Electric Power Research Institute, the esti-
ing the benefits of power converters, e.g., to have fast responses mated electricity consumption in USA is shown in Fig. 2. The
and flexible controllability. In this way, it is possible to build a majority of electricity, over 50%, is consumed by motors. The
more robust, more reliable, and more resilient power system. Internet devices consume over 10% and lighting devices con-
Since a VSM is not a physical synchronous machine but built sume about 20%. Other loads consume the rest 20% electricity.
from, and dependent upon, the seamless integration of compu- It has been well known that the adoption of motor drives is able
tational algorithms and a physical power electronic converter, to significantly improve the efficiency of motor applications
the term cyber synchronous machine (CSM) is coined here to [16]. Motor drives are equipped with power electronic rectifiers
better reflect this according to the definition of cyber-physical to convert ac electricity into dc electricity, which is then used to
systems (CPS).1 drive DC motors or converted into variable-frequency ac to drive
Some ideas of this paper were presented at (semi-)plenary AC motors. Hence, the electricity consumed by motors is actu-
talks, panel discussions, tutorials, and workshops at several ally consumed by power electronic rectifiers. Internet devices
conferences, including the 2016 IEEE PES General Meeting, consume dc electricity, which is converted from ac electricity
IEEE ISIE 2016, IEEE ECCE 2015, The 1st Indian Control by power electronic rectifiers as well. As to lighting devices,
there is a clear trend in the lighting market to adopt LED lights,
1 National Science Foundation, Program solicitation on cyber-physical
which also consume dc electricity as well. Hence, in the fu-
systems (CPS), 2016, NSF 17-529, https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2017/ ture, the majority of electricity will be consumed by rectifiers,
nsf17529/nsf17529.pdf. whatever the end function is.
ZHONG: POWER-ELECTRONICS-ENABLED AUTONOMOUS POWER SYSTEMS: ARCHITECTURE AND TECHNICAL ROUTES
On the supply side, more and more DER are being connected
to the grid through power electronic inverters. For example,
most wind turbines generate electricity at variable frequencies
and require power electronic converters to control the generation
and interaction with the grid. Solar panels generate dc electric-
ity, which needs to be converted into ac electricity to make it
compatible with the grid as well. Similarly, electric vehicles and
storage systems require power electronic converters to integrate
with the grid.
In transmission and distribution networks, in order to reduce
losses and improve controllability, more and more power elec-
tronic converters, e.g., high-voltage direct current (HVDC) links
[17] and flexible ac transmission systems (FACTS) devices [18],
are being added to electronically, rather than mechanically, con-
trol future power systems [19].
Putting all the above together, future power systems will be
power electronics based, instead of electric machines based,
with a huge number of relatively small and nonsynchronous
players at the supply side, inside the network and at the demand
side. The fundamental challenge is how to organically grow and
operate these systems without jeopardizing the system stability,
i.e., how to make millions or even billions of different players
work together. Because of the huge number of players involved,
it will no longer be viable for low-level controls to rely on
communication network. It will no longer be viable to manage
these systems through human interaction, either. It is crucial to
find a mechanism to enable the organic growth and autonomous
stable operation of future power systems.
III. FUTURE OF POWER SYSTEMS
A. Synchronization Mechanism of SMWhat Underpins
the Growth and Operation of Power Systems
A vital problem that needs to be answered when the power
system is going through the transition from electric machines
based to power electronics based is whether it is possible to
continue adopting the major principles that have already been
established in current power systems. If yes, this is going to
significantly reduce the cost and effort involved in this transition.
Looking at the current power systems, it is easy to find out
that the electricity generation is dominated by synchronous gen-
erators in coal-fired power plants, nuclear power plants, hydro
power plants, etc. There must be a reason why the industry has
decided to adopt SM while there are different types of electric
machines. This can be understood from the mathematical model
of synchronous generators.
A synchronous generator is governed by the well-known
swing equation:
1
= (Tm Te Dp ) (1)
J tion mechanism, of conventional SM. As for loads, since the
where is the rotor angle; is the angular speed of the machine;
Tm is the mechanical torque applied to the rotor; J is the moment
of inertia of all the parts rotating with the rotor; Dp is the friction
coefficient; and Te is the electromagnetic torque
Te = pMf if i, s
in 
5909
where p is the number of pairs of poles of the magnetic field;
i is the stator current; if is the field excitation current; Mf is
the maximum mutual inductance between the stator windings
and the field winding; and ,  denotes the conventional in-
ner product. The vectors s  , are defined,
in , together with cos
respectively, as
cos sin
 = cos( 2
cos
3 ) , s
2
in = sin( 3 ) .
4
cos( 3 ) sin( 4 3 )
The three-phase generated voltage e and the reactive power Q,
respectively, are given as
e = Mf if s
in , (3)
  .
Q = Mf if i, cos (4)
Assume that the terminal voltage is v. Then, the stator current
is given as follows:
ev
i= (5)
sL + R
where sL + R is the impedance of the stator windings. Note that
i, e, and v in (5) are the Laplace transform of the corresponding
signals. The mathematical model of an SM described in (1)(5)
actually performs the function of an enhanced phase-locked loop
(PLL) called the sinusoid-locked loop [1], [21], which includes
a frequency channel to synchronize the frequency and the phase
and a voltage channel to synchronize the amplitude with the
terminal voltage. In other words, SM have the inherent mech-
anism of synchronization, which allows them to synchronize
with each other or the grid autonomously. The synchronization
mechanism of SM is the mechanism that has underpinned the
growth and operation of power systems for over 100 years.
B. Architecture for Future Autonomous Power Systems
The main contribution of this paper is to point out that the
synchronization mechanism of SM can continue to be adopted to
underpin future power systems and to propose the correspond-
ing architecture for future power systems shown in Fig. 3. In
such a power system, all conventional power plants, including
coal-fired, hydro, and nuclear power plants are connected to
the transmission and distribution network through SM, as nor-
mally done without any major change. For all DER that need
power electronic inverters to interface with the grid, the invert-
ers can be controlled to behave like VSM, more specifically,
virtual synchronous generators, by embedding the mathemati-
cal model of conventional synchronous generators as the core
of the controllers for these inverters. Hence, these inverters can
have the same dynamic behavior, in particular, the synchroniza-
majority of them will have rectifiers at the front end to interface
with the grid, these rectifiers can also be controlled to behave
like VSM, more specifically, virtual synchronous motors. For
HVDC links, the power electronic converters at both ends can
be controlled as VSM, one as a virtual synchronous generator
(2) and the other as a virtual synchronous motor, as well.
5910
Fig. 3. Proposed architecture for future power-electronics-enabled autonomous power systems, which actually offers a technical solution to realize
the lateral power that underpins the Third Industrial Revolution as envisioned in [20].
In a power system shown in Fig. 3, all power-electronics-
based players, at the supply side, at the demand side, and inside
the network, are empowered to actively take part in the regu-
lation of system stability in the same way as SM. Because the
synchronization mechanism of SM is inherently embedded in-
side all the active players, they autonomously interact with each
other via exchanging power through the electricity network. This
paves the way for the autonomous operation of power systems,
which means minimal human intervention is needed to maintain
the system operation within the designed operational boundaries
of the frequency and the voltage. For example, when a coal-fired
power plant is tripped off, the system frequency drops. Because
of this, all SM/VSM that take part in the autonomous regula-
tion of system stability on the supply side would quickly and
autonomously respond to the frequency drop and increase the
power output. At the same time, all VSM that take part in the
autonomous regulation of system stability on the demand side
would autonomously decrease power consumption. As a result,
the frequency drop is reduced, which helps reduce the num-
ber of loads to be tripped off. If a new power balance cannot
be reached after all generators reach the maximum capacity
then some VSM that serve noncritical loads further reduce the
power consumption. Similarly, if a heavy load is turned off, all
SM/VSM that take part in the autonomous regulation of system
stability on the supply side would quickly and autonomously
reduce the power output and all VSM that can take part in the
autonomous regulation of system stability on the demand side
would autonomously increase power consumption to help reach
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 64, NO. 7, JULY 2017
new power balance. The increase or decrease of load power can
be of short term or long term, depending on the types and func-
tions of loads. Similarly, the variability of DER can be taken
care of by the system players. It is worthy emphasizing that all
the SM and VSM have the inherent mechanism of synchroniza-
tion so there is no need to rely on additional communication
network to achieve this low-level control. In other words, the
communication network can be released from low-level con-
trol to focus on high-level functions of power systems, e.g.,
supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) and market
operations [22]. This also helps enhance the cybersecurity of the
system because no access to low-level control is provided for
malicious attackers. This architecture will also facilitate con-
tinuous demand response and turn all players into active and
responsible players to maintain system stability, which avoids
some customers to suffer load shedding and improves quality of
service. Because the key principle that has underpinned power
systems for over 100 years is adopted, the transition of todays
grid into tomorrows is expected to be evolutionary rather than
revolutionary.
This architecture is scalable and can be applied to power
systems at different scales, from single-node systems to million-
node systems, from vehicles, aircraft to public grids. When there
is a need, small systems can be connected together. If a part of
the system is faulty, then it can be disconnected; after the fault
is cleared, it can be reconnected to the grid.
Unlike the normal hierarchical architecture, e.g., the ones
proposed in [6], [9], and [23], this architecture is technically
ZHONG: POWER-ELECTRONICS-ENABLED AUTONOMOUS POWER SYSTEMS: ARCHITECTURE AND TECHNICAL ROUTES 5911

lateral, although a hierarchical management structure could be

added on top of the lateral technical structure. This empowers all
players to directly take part in the regulation of system stability
and enhances system autonomy [24], which is consistent with
the worldwide trend of increasing autonomy and declining hi-
erarchy in many fields [25], [26]. As a matter of fact, this offers
a technical solution to realize the lateral power that underpins
the Third Industrial Revolution, as envisioned in [20].
The implementation of this architecture will signifi-
cantly reduce the infrastructure investment on generation/
transmission/distribution network. For example, the capacity
of the U.K. power grid is about 70 GW. If the load contributes
2% in contingencies, which is within the tolerance for most in-
dividual loads, then the total contribution from all loads is about
1.4 GW, which is at the level of a nuclear power plant. It is
also able to release the inertia that already exists in the system
and considerably reduce the operational cost because of the fast
action of power electronic converters. For example, if there are
ten million laptops plugged in a network and each contributes
10 W when needed, then the equivalent reserve amounts to
100 MW. The large amount of big industrial motors, wind tur-
bines, and electric vehicles, etc., can all contribute to the system
reserve/inertia. This architecture can also considerably reduce
the infrastructure investment on communication networks and
cybersecurity because the low-level control does no longer rely Fig. 4. Three-phase synchronverter [35]: (a) power part and (b) elec-
on the communication network. tronic part.
Different/similar options to implement VSMs have been pro-
posed in the literature. The VISMA approach [27], [28] controls
the inverter current to follow the current reference generated ac- IV. TECHNICAL ROUTE BASED ON THE SYNCHRONVERTER
cording to the mathematical model of SM, which makes invert- TECHNOLOGY
ers behave like controlled current sources. Since power systems A. Original Synchronverter to Operate Inverters as
are dominated by voltage sources, this may impose potential Virtual Synchronous Generators
detrimental impact on the system, in particular, on system sta-
bility [29][31]. The approach proposed in [32] follows the Synchronverters [34], [35] were originally proposed as in-
mathematical model of SM but it requires the measurement of verters that mimic synchronous generators, with the power part
the grid frequency, which is often problematic in practice [33]. shown in Fig. 4(a) and the electronic part shown in Fig. 4(b). The
The synchronverter approach directly embeds the mathematical controller includes the mathematical model of synchronous gen-
model of SM into the controller to control the voltage gener- erators described by (1)(4). The voltage e generated according
ated without the need of measuring the grid frequency [34][36]. to the mathematical models (1)(4) is converted into pulse width
The approach proposed in [37] controls the voltage but it also re- modulation (PWM) pulses to drive the power semiconductor
switches in the power part so that the average of voltages
quires the measurement of the grid frequency for the real power-  T
frequency droop control. The synchronverter has the simplest ea eb ec over each switching period is the same as e. The
 T
structure with the lowest number of control parameters among currents ia ib ic flowing out of the inverter are measured
all available options today and has been further developed for and treated as the stator current i and fed back to the mathe-
microrgrids [38], HVDC applications [39], [40], STATCOM matical model of SM, which implements (5). Hence, the math-
[41], PV inverters [42], wind power [43], motor drives [44], and ematical models (1)(4) are linked together with the power part
rectifiers [45], [46]. In Section IV, the synchronverter-based shown in Fig. 4(a). Then, the matured technologies developed
technical route is outlined to implement the architecture shown for SM, e.g., the frequency droop and voltage droop control, can
in Fig. 3. be applied. The friction coefficient Dp actually plays the role of
Recently, it has been revealed that droop controllers and (en- frequency droop and, hence, the frequency droop control can be
hanced) PLLs are essentially the same thing but operated under easily implemented via comparing the virtual frequency with
different conditions [47], [48]. This means the synchronization the reference frequency r . The field excitation current if can
mechanism of SM inherently exists in the well-known droop be regulated by an integrator that controls the reactive power
control strategy as well. In Section V, another technical route, Q, with respect to the reference reactive power Qset . A voltage
which is based on an improved droop control strategy called the droop controller is added to the reactive power control loop via
robust droop controller, is outlined to implement the architecture the voltage droop coefficient Dq . The mechanical torque Tm can
shown in Fig. 3. be obtained via scaling the real power Pset because the frequency
5912
Fig. 5. Frequency regulation capability of a synchronverter connected
to the U.K. public grid.
Fig. 6. Controller for a self-synchronized synchronverter [36].
of the inverter is assumed to be regulated within a tight range
around the nominal frequency n . The controller also includes a
PLL to provide the grid frequency as the reference frequency r
and the grid phase g for synchronization before connecting the
synchronverter to the grid or when operating it in the set mode
to send the desired power to the grid.
In addition to operating in the set mode, synchronverters are
able to operate in the droop mode to take part in the regulation of
system frequency and voltage. Fig. 5 shows the frequency reg-
ulation of a synchronverter connected to the grid in the droop
mode. The real power sent to the grid is autonomously changed
according to the varying grid frequency. When the frequency
increases, the real power decreases; when the frequency de-
creases, the real power increases. Similarly, a synchronverter
could take part in the regulation of voltage by autonomously
changing the reactive power exchanged with the grid according
to the varying voltage.
B. Self-Synchronized Synchronverters
As reported in [36], the PLL in the synchronverter can be
removed after making some changes to the controller. As shown
in Fig. 6, the difference between the generated voltage e and the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 64, NO. 7, JULY 2017
Fig. 7. Controller to operate a rectifier as a VSM [46].
1
grid voltage vg is put through a low-pass filter L s+R , which
functions like a virtual stator winding, to generate a virtual
current is . After setting Pset and Qset to zero, turning SQ OFF to
disable the voltage droop control, and replacing the grid current
ig with the virtual current is , the voltage e can be established
to be the same as the grid voltage vg before the synchronverter
is connected to the grid, with the help of the PI controller to
regulate T to zero. This is equivalent to floating a synchronous
generator on the grid without exchanging any real power or
reactive power.
C. Operating Rectifiers as Virtual Synchronous Motors
The same idea can be applied to operate rectifiers as virtual
synchronous motors [45], [46]. As shown in Fig. 7, the controller
includes the mathematical model of a synchronous motor and
a PI controller to regulate the dc-bus voltage Vo around the
reference voltage Vref and generate the mechanical torque Tm .
Similarly, a low-pass filter sL1+R is adopted to generate the
virtual current is for self-synchronization, together with the PI
controller that regulates the output of the Dp block to zero. The
voltage droop loop is omitted in Fig. 7 but it can be added if
voltage regulation is needed. Some experimental results from
a rectifier connected to the grid are shown in Fig. 8. When
the reference value for the dc-bus voltage and the load were
changed, the virtual frequency of the rectifier was able to track
the grid frequency quickly and accurately.
V. TECHNICAL ROUTE BASED ON THE ROBUST DROOP
CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
The electricity generation of current power systems is dom-
inated by SM, which have inductive output impedances. How-
ever, future power systems will be dominated by power elec-
tronic converters, of which the output impedances change with
the design and control of the converters and could be in-
ductive (L-inverters), resistive (R-inverters) [49], [50], capac-
itive (C-inverters) [51], [52], resistive-inductive (RL -inverters),
resistivecapacitive (RC -inverters), or complex around the fun-
damental frequency. The impedance of converters plays an im-
portant role in system stability. Moreover, for inverters with
ZHONG: POWER-ELECTRONICS-ENABLED AUTONOMOUS POWER SYSTEMS: ARCHITECTURE AND TECHNICAL ROUTES 5913

Fig. 8. Operation of a rectifier as a VSM: (a) virtual frequency of the

rectifier and the grid frequency g and (b) dc-bus voltage.

Fig. 10. Conventional droop control principles [1]: (a) for resis-
tive impedance; (b) for inductive impedance; and (c) for capacitive
impedance.

Vo 0 . Since the current flowing through the impedance is

E cos Vo + jE sin
I =
Zo
Fig. 9. Power delivered to a voltage source through an impedance. the real power and reactive power delivered to the terminal via
the impedance can be obtained as

EVo V2 EVo
different types of output impedance, the conventional droop P = cos o cos + sin sin , (6)
Zo Zo Zo
controllers have different forms [1]. The robust droop controller

[50], initially proposed for R-inverters to achieve accurate power EVo V2 EVo
Q= cos o sin sin cos (7)
sharing and tight voltage regulation, has recently been proven Zo Zo Zo
to be applicable to inverters with output impedance having an
impedance angle between 2 and 2 rad [53], and hence, it where is the phase difference between the voltage source
is universal. Furthermore, it can be equipped with the self- and the terminal. It is often called the power angle and has a
synchronization mechanism mentioned above so that no ad- small value in order to maintain system stability. Based on these,
ditional PLL is needed [54]. In this section, it will be shown droop control strategies can be developed to regulate the voltage
at first that droop controllers are structurally the same as PLL source [1]. For different types of impedances, the conventional
and hence droop controllers have the inherent synchronization droop control principles are different, as shown in Fig. 10 for
mechanism of SM. Then, a technical route based on the robust inductive, resistive, and capacitive impedances.
droop control will be illustrated. For inverters with resistive impedance (R-inverters), the droop
relationship is P E and Q , where means in pro-
portion to, and the conventional droop controller is
A. Inherent Synchronization Capability of Droop Ei = E ni Pi
ControlStructural Resemblance Between PLLs and
Droop Controllers i = + mi Qi .
An inverter can be modeled as the series connection of an As demonstrated in [47] and [48], the equivalent structure of
ideal voltage source vr and an output impedance Zo . Fig. 9 this droop control can be found as shown in Fig. 11(a), which
illustrates such an inverter delivering power to a voltage source is structurally the same as the enhanced PLL (EPLL) or the
5914 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 64, NO. 7, JULY 2017

accurate power sharing and tight voltage regulation, which

makes these inverters to be able to take part in the regulation of
system frequency and voltage.

C. Universal Droop Control

The power delivered to the terminal as characterized by
(6)(7) can be rewritten as
    
P cos sin P
=
Q sin cos Q
with
  E Vo 2

P cos VZoo
= Z o . (8)
Q EZV o sin
o

This means the vector P + jQ is obtained via  rotating the vector


Fig. 11. Structural resemblance between the droop control and the
EPLL [48]: (a) droop controlled system with a resistive impedance and
(b) EPLL.
Fig. 12. Robust droop controller [50], which is universal for inverters
with different types of impedances [53].
sinusoid-tracking algorithm for synchronization [55][58], as
shown in Fig. 11(b). In other words, droop controllers have the
inherent synchronization mechanism of SM as well and can be
adopted to implement the architecture shown in Fig. 3.
B. Robust Droop Control
The conventional droop control is not robust against param-
eter drifts, component mismatches and numerical errors etc.
Moreover, there is a fundamental tradeoff between the voltage
regulation and power sharing accuracy [50]. A robust droop con-
troller, as shown in Fig. 12, is proposed in [50] to address these
problems, after introducing an integrator into the voltage am-
plitude channel and an output voltage feedback. These change
the voltage droop from the set point E to the output voltage Vo .
As a result, R-inverters can be operated in parallel to achieve
cos sin
P + j Q by . Note that the eigenvalues of are
sin cos
cos j sin , of which the real part cos is positive for any
impedance with ( 2 , 2 ). Hence,
P P and Q Q.
Moreover, according to (8), there are
P E and Q (9)
for ( 2 ,
2 ). As a result,
P E and Q .
This is the same as the droop relationship shown in Fig. 10(a) for
resistive impedance. In other words, the robust droop controller
shown in Fig. 12 is universal for inverters having an impedance
angle between 2 and 2 rad [53]. This considerably reduces
the complexity of future power systems.
D. Self-Synchronized Universal Droop Control
The self-synchronization mechanism for synchronverters
mentioned in Section IV-B can be applied to the universal droop
controller discussed above. The resulting self-synchronized uni-
versal droop controller [54] is shown in Fig. 13. In the self-
synchronization mode, both SP and SQ are OFF and a virtual
current is is generated by the voltage difference between the
output voltage vo and the grid voltage vg . This regulates the real
power P and reactive power Q to be zero and forces vo to be
the same as vg , i.e., to achieve synchronization. Once the syn-
chronization is achieved, the inverter can be connected and then
operated in the set mode to send the desired power Pset and Qset
to the grid or in the droop mode to take part in the regulation of
system frequency and voltage.
Fig. 14 shows the frequency and voltage regulation capability
of an inverter equipped with the self-synchronized universal
droop controller operated in the droop mode. The real power P
is autonomously changed according to the varying voltage E
and the reactive power Q is changed according to the varying
frequency f . When the voltage increases, the generated real
power decreases; when the voltage decreases, the generated
real power increases. When the grid frequency increases, the
generated reactive power increases; when the grid frequency
ZHONG: POWER-ELECTRONICS-ENABLED AUTONOMOUS POWER SYSTEMS: ARCHITECTURE AND TECHNICAL ROUTES 5915

Fig. 13. Self-synchronized universal droop controller [54].

200

Fig. 14. Experimental results of an inverter equipped with the self-

synchronized universal droop controller in regulating the system fre- Fig. 15. Simulation results of a rectifier equipped with the self-
quency and voltage [54]. synchronized universal droop controller in regulating the system fre-
quency and voltage.

decreases, the generated reactive power decreases. The inverter TABLE I

PARAMETERS OF THE SYSTEM SHOWN IN FIG. 16
has excellent balancing capability for real and reactive power
with fast reaction.
Weak Grid R-Inverter L-Inverter C-Inverter
Rated apparent power S 30 kVA 15 kVA 10 kVA 5 kVA
E. Droop-Controlled Rectifiers Inductance L s 0.35 mH 0.7 mH 1.05 mH 2.1 mH
Resistance R s 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.12
The controller shown in Fig. 13 can be applied to rectifiers Inductance L g 0.035 mH 0.07 mH 0.105 mH 0.21 mH
as well, after adding a controller to regulate the dc-bus voltage Resistance R g 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.012
Vo around the reference voltage Vref and to generate Pset . This Capacitance C 10 F 10 F 10 F 10 F

is very similar to Fig. 7, where the output Tm of the controller

is replaced with Pset here. Fig. 15 shows the simulation results
from a 110 VAC to 200 VDC rectifier rated at 182 W. The voltage
varies in the range of 108.9112.3 VAC, which makes the real
power drawn by the rectifier to change in the range of 168
245 W. The frequency varies in the range of 59.8560.21 Hz,
which leads to the reactive power to change in the range of 76
to 108 Var. When the voltage increases, the real power drawn
by the rectifier increases; when the voltage decreases, the real
power drawn by the rectifier decreases. When the grid frequency
increases, the reactive power drawn by the rectifier decreases;
when the grid frequency decreases, the reactive power drawn
increases. The rectifier presents excellent balancing capability
for real and reactive power with fast reaction. Comparing Fig. 15
with Fig. 14, it can be seen that the droop-controlled inverters
and rectifiers have complementary balancing capability for real
power and reactive power and can work together to maintain the
stability of voltage and frequency.
VI. ILLUSTRATION VIA REAL-TIME SIMULATIONS
In order to illustrate how such a system works, a single-phase
test system as shown in Fig. 16 was simulated with an OPAL
RT OP5607, which is a powerful real-time simulator having the
software environment compatible with MATLAB/Simulink.
Since inverters with different types of output impedances could
potentially destabilize a system, the test system was designed
to include an R-inverter, an L-inverter and a C-inverter with
the parameters given in Table I. The inverters are connected to
the same AC bus in a weak grid. The line impedance among
5916
Fig. 16. Test system with three inverters connected to a weak grid.
the inverters is omitted while the line impedance between the
AC bus and the grid is modeled as a 0.24-mH inductor in series
with a 0.1- resistor [59]. The weak gird was implemented by
a 30 kVA R-inverter, which was equipped with the universal
droop controller discussed in Section V-C. The three inverters,
rated at 15 , 10, and 5 kVA, respectively, were equipped with the
self-synchronized universal droop controller shown in Fig. 13.
The rated RMS system voltage and frequency are 230 V and
50 Hz, respectively. The parameters of the inverters were not
optimized but selected empirically with the intention to demon-
strate the robustness of the system. The inverter bridges were
implemented as controlled voltage sources. The simulation
was carried out with the solver ode3 (BogackiShampine) at a
fixed step of 50 s. The relevant signals, as shown in Fig. 17,
were sent out through the digital/analog channels of OP5607
and then captured by a Yokogawa 8-channel signal analyzer
DL7480. Note that the real power, the reactive power, and the
voltage of each inverter and the grid were measured at the
terminal for control purposes.
The droop coefficients were chosen in such a way that 100%
increase of real power P results in 10% decrease of voltage E
and 100% increase of reactive power Q results in 1% increase of
the frequency f . The inductance of the virtual impedance used
in the controller for the three inverters to generate the virtual
current for synchronization was 1 mH for all inverters and the
resistance was 2, 3, and 6 for the R-inverter, the L-inverter,
and the C-inverter, respectively.
In order to illustrate the operation of such a system under
different modes, a series of actions were taken. The details are
described as follows.
1) Black start of the system. At t = 0 s, the weak grid
started to supply electricity to the load (3 in series with
1.8 mH). The point of common coupling (PCC) voltage
was 211.6 V, which was about 8% below the rated value
230 V. The voltage drop was due to the line impedance
of the weak grid and the droop effect. The system
frequency was 50.05 Hz, which was about 0.1% above
the rated value because of the 3 kVar reactive power.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 64, NO. 7, JULY 2017
Fig. 17. Real-time simulation results from the system in Fig. 16:
(a) real power and RMS voltage and (b) reactive power and frequency.
2) Synchronization of the inverters to the grid. The self-
synchronization mode was enabled for the R-inverter,
L-inverter, and C-inverter at 0.5 s, 1.0 s and 1.5 s one by
one. All inverters synchronized with the PCC voltage and
frequency gradually and quickly.
3) Connection of the inverters to the grid. At t = 3 s, all
inverters with Pset = 0 and Qset = 0 were connected to
the grid at the PCC. The connection was very smooth,
without any noticeable spikes in real power P and reactive
power Q.
4) Operation in the set mode. At t = 4 s, Pset was changed to
7.5 kW, 5 kW, and 2.5 kW, and Qset to 0.9 kVar, 0.6 kVar,
and 0.3 kVar for the R-inverter, L-inverter, and C-inverter,
respectively. The PCC voltage increased to 227.6 V,
which was about 1% below the rated value 230 V, be-
cause all the inverters started injecting real power to the
grid and the grid only supplied about 2.4 kW, i.e., 0.8%
of the capacity, to the load. The frequency decreased to
50.02 Hz, which was about 0.04% above the rated fre-
quency, because the grid only supplied about 1.26 kVar,
i.e., about 0.04% of the capacity, to the load. As can be
seen, all the inverters injected the required real power and
reactive power to the grid and the grid picked up the rest
of the load. Note that in this case, the inverters did not
ZHONG: POWER-ELECTRONICS-ENABLED AUTONOMOUS POWER SYSTEMS: ARCHITECTURE AND TECHNICAL ROUTES
take part in the regulation of the grid. The PCC frequency
and voltage were regulated by the grid.
5) Operation in the droop mode with nonzero Pset and
Qset . At t = 10 s, the droop modes were enabled, which
forced the R-inverter, L-inverter, and C-inverter to take
more load (proportionally) because the PCC voltage was
below the rated value and the frequency was above the
rated value. As a result, the real power and reactive power
provided by the grid decreased, which autonomously
brought both the grid voltage and grid frequency closer
to the rated values, respectively. Note that the PCC fre-
quency and voltage were still mainly regulated by the
grid because of the nonzero power set-points.
6) Operation in the droop mode with zero Pset and Qset . At
t = 13 s, the Pset and Qset were changed to 0. The invert-
ers sent less real power to the grid because of the drop
of the power set-points, which caused the PCC voltage
to drop to 222 V, i.e., about 3.4% of the rated voltage. In
this case, for the R-inverter, according to the droop coef-
ficients, i.e., 10% decrease of voltage E results in 100%
increase of real power P , the real power was expected to
be 3.4%
10% 15 kW 5.1 kW. Indeed, as shown in Fig. 17,
the real power P of the R-inverter was around 5.1 kW.
At the same time, the frequency was 50.024 Hz, which
was 0.048% above the rated frequency 50 Hz. For the R-
inverter, according to the set droop coefficients, i.e., 1%
increase of f results in 100% increase of Q, the reactive
power was expected to be 0.048%1% 15 kVar 0.72 kVar.
As shown in Fig. 17, the reactive power was indeed
around 0.72 kVar. Similarly, the L-inverter and C-inverter
supplied the real power P and reactive power Q corre-
spondingly. In this case, all the inverters took part in the
regulation of the PCC frequency and voltage.
7) Autonomous operation in the droop mode in response to
load change. At t = 16 s, an RC load (20 in parallel
with 300 F) was connected at the PCC. The real power
supplied by the grid further increased but the reactive
power decreased to a negative value because of the strong
capacitive load, which caused the PCC voltage to drop
further and brought the frequency below the rated value.
All the inverters also autonomously changed the real
power and reactive power. Again, all the inverters took
part in the regulation of the PCC frequency and voltage.
Note that no instability occurred although the output
impedances of the inverters and the grid had different types
and values and the load changed from inductive to capacitive.
VII. CONCLUSION
Power systems are going through a paradigm change from
centralized generation to distributed generation. It has been
shown that future power systems will be power electronics
based with a huge number of incompatible players. The syn-
chronization mechanism of conventional SM can continue to
be adopted in future power systems, after controlling power
electronic converters in these players to behave like VSM. A
lateral architecture has been proposed for future power sys-
tems based on this synchronization mechanism to empower
all these players to take part in the regulation of system fre-
5917
quency and voltage. This actually offers a technical solution
to realize the lateral power envisioned in [20]. Two technical
routes, one based on the synchronverter technology and the
other based on the robust droop control technology, have been
presented to implement the proposed grid architecture. Real-
time simulation results have illustrated the operation of such
a system. Live discussions and future updates are available at
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/7061909.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author would like to thank Dr. F. Lee for the stimulating
discussions, and Dr. W.-L. Ming and Dr. Y. Zeng for their help
on the real-time simulations.
REFERENCES
[1] Q.-C. Zhong and T. Hornik, Control of Power Inverters in Renewable
Energy and Smart Grid Integration. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2013.
[2] K. Moslehi and R. Kumar, A reliability perspective of the smart grid,
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 5764, Jun. 2010.
[3] P. Eder-Neuhauser, T. Zseby, and J. Fabini, Resilience and security: A
qualitative survey of urban smart grid architectures, IEEE Access, vol. 4,
pp. 839848, Feb. 2016.
[4] T. M. Overman, R. W. Sackman, T. L. Davis, and B. S. Cohen, High-
assurance smart grid: A three-part model for smart grid control systems,
Proc. IEEE, vol. 99, no. 6, pp. 10461062, Jun. 2011.
[5] T. Strasser et al., A review of architectures and concepts for intelligence
in future electric energy systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62,
no. 4, pp. 24242438, Apr. 2015.
[6] D. Boroyevich, I. Cvetkovic, R. Burgos, and D. Dong, Intergrid: A future
electronic energy network? IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron.,
vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 127138, Sep. 2013.
[7] EPRI, The integrated grid: Realizing the full value of central and
distributed energy resources, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo
Alto, CA, USA, Tech. Rep. 3002002733, 2014. [Online]. Available:
http://www.epri.com/abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?ProductId=
000000003002002733
[8] M. Kezunovic, V. Vittal, S. Meliopoulos, and T. Mount, The big pic-
ture: Smart research for large-scale integrated smart grid solutions, IEEE
Power Energy Mag., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 2234, Jul. 2012.
[9] A. Q. Huang, M. L. Crow, G. T. Heydt, J. P. Zheng, and S. J. Dale, The
future renewable electric energy delivery and management (FREEDM)
system: The energy internet, Proc. IEEE, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 133148,
Jan. 2011.
[10] G. T. Costanzo, G. Zhu, M. F. Anjos, and G. Savard, A system architecture
for autonomous demand side load management in smart buildings, IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 21572165, Dec. 2012.
[11] F. Wang, Z. Zhang, T. Ericsen, R. Raju, R. Burgos, and D. Boroyevich,
Advances in power conversion and drives for shipboard systems, Proc.
IEEE, vol. 103, no. 12, pp. 22852311, Dec. 2015.
[12] A. Emadi, S. S. Williamson, and A. Khaligh, Power electronics intensive
solutions for advanced electric, hybrid electric, and fuel cell vehicular
power systems, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 567
577, May 2006.
[13] K. Emadi and M. Ehsani, Aircraft power systems: Technology, state of
the art, and future trends, IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 15,
no. 1, pp. 2832, Jan. 2000.
[14] P. Kundur, Power System Stability and Control. New York, NY, USA:
McGraw-Hill, 1994.
[15] EIA, Annual energy review 2010, U.S. Energy Information
Administration, Washington, D.C., USA, Tech. Rep. DOE/EIA-
0384(2010), Oct. 2011, [Online]. Available: http://www.eia.gov/
totalenergy/data/annual/archive/038410.pdf
[16] B. Bose, Power electronics and motor drives recent progress and per-
spective, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 581588, Feb.
2009.
[17] J. Arrillaga, High Voltage Direct Current Transmission. London, U.K.:
Inst. Elect. Eng., 2008.
[18] N. Hingorani and L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS: Concepts and Tech-
nology of Flexible AC Transmission Systems. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley,
1999.
5918 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 64, NO. 7, JULY 2017
[19] N. G. Hingorani, Power electronics in electric utilities: Role of power
electronics in future power systems, Proc. IEEE, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 481
482, Apr. 1988.
[20] J. Rifkin, The Third Industrial Revolution: How Lateral Power Is Trans-
forming Energy, the Economy, and the World. Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave
Macmillan, Oct. 2011.
[21] Q.-C. Zhong and P.-L. Nguyen, Sinusoid-locked loops to detect the fre-
quency, the ampitude and the phase of the fundamental component of a
periodic signal, in Proc. 24th Chin. Control Decis. Conf., Taiyuan, China,
May 2012, pp. 15181523.
[22] F. F. Wu, K. Moslehi, and A. Bose, Power system control centers: Past,
present, and future, Proc. IEEE, vol. 93, no. 11, pp. 18901908, Nov.
2005.
[23] M. Marzband, N. Parhizi, M. Savaghebi, and J. M. Guerrero, Distributed
smart decision-making for a multimicrogrid system based on a hierarchical
interactive architecture, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 31, no. 2,
pp. 637648, Jun. 2016.
[24] C. Anderson and C. E. Brown, The functions and dysfunctions of hierar-
chy, Res. Organizational Behav., vol. 30, pp. 5589, 2010.
[25] K. Moore, The decline but not fall of hierarchyWhat young
people really want, Forbes, Jun. 2011, [Online]. Available:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/karlmoore/2011/06/14/the-decline-but-not-
fall-of-hierarchy-what-young-people-really-want/
[26] T. L. Friedman, The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first
Century. New York, NY, USA: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2005.
[27] H.-P. Beck and R. Hesse, Virtual synchronous machine, in Proc. 9th Int.
Conf. Elect. Power Qual. Utilisation, 2007, pp. 16.
[28] Y. Chen, R. Hesse, D. Turschner, and H.-P. Beck, Improving the grid
power quality using virtual synchronous machines, in Proc. Int. Conf.
Power Eng. Energy Elect. Drives, 2011, pp. 16.
[29] J. Sun, Impedance-based stability criterion for grid-connected inverters,
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 26, no. 11, pp. 30753078, Nov. 2011.
[30] D. Dong, B. Wen, P. Mattavelli, D. Boroyevich, and Y. Xue, Grid-
synchronization modeling and its stability analysis for multi-paralleled
three-phase inverter systems, in Proc. 28th Annu. IEEE Appl. Power
Electron. Conf. Expo., 2013, pp. 439446.
[31] B. Wen, D. Boroyevich, R. Burgos, P. Mattavelli, and Z. Shen, Small-
signal stability analysis of three-phase AC systems in the presence of
constant power loads based on measured d-q frame impedances, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 59525963, Oct. 2015.
[32] F. Gao and M. R. Iravani, A control strategy for a distributed generation
unit in grid-connected and autonomous modes of operation, IEEE Trans.
Power Del., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 850859, Apr. 2008.
[33] D. Dong, B. Wen, D. Boroyevich, P. Mattavelli, and Y. Xue, Analysis of
phase-locked loop low-frequency stability in three-phase grid-connected
power converters considering impedance interactions, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 310321, Jan. 2015.
[34] Q.-C. Zhong and G. Weiss, Static synchronous generators for distributed
generation and renewable energy, in Proc. IEEE PES Power Syst. Conf.
Exhib., 2009, pp. 16.
[35] Q.-C. Zhong and G. Weiss, Synchronverters: Inverters that mimic syn-
chronous generators, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 1259
1267, Apr. 2011.
[36] Q.-C. Zhong, P.-L. Nguyen, Z. Ma, and W. Sheng, Self-synchronised
synchronverters: Inverters without a dedicated synchronisation unit, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 617630, Feb. 2014.
[37] M. Karimi-Ghartemani, Universal integrated synchronization and control
for single-phase DC/AC converters, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 30,
no. 3, pp. 15441557, Mar. 2015.
[38] S. M. Ashabani and Y. A. I. Mohamed, A flexible control strategy for grid-
connected and islanded microgrids with enhanced stability using nonlinear
microgrid stabilizer, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1291
1301, Sep. 2012.
[39] R. Aouini, B. Marinescu, K. B. Kilani, and M. Elleuch, Synchronverter-
based emulation and control of HVDC transmission, IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 278286, Jan. 2016.
[40] S. Dong, Y. Chi, and Y. Li, Active voltage feedback control for hybrid
multiterminal HVDC system adopting improved synchronverters, IEEE
Trans. Power Del., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 445455, Apr. 2016.
[41] P.-L. Nguyen, Q.-C. Zhong, F. Blaabjerg, and J. Guerrero,
Synchronverter-based operation of STATCOM to mimic synchronous
condensers, in Proc. 7th IEEE Conf. Ind. Electron. Appl., Singapore, Jul.
2012, pp. 942947.
[42] W.-L. Ming and Q.-C. Zhong, Synchronverter-based transformerless PV
inverters, in Proc. 40th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., Oct. 2014,
pp. 43964401.
[43] Q.-C. Zhong, Z. Ma, W.-L. Ming, and G. C. Konstantopoulos, Grid-
friendly wind power systems based on the synchronverter technology,
Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 719726, 2015.
[44] Q.-C. Zhong, ac ward leonard drive systems: Revisiting the four-quadrant
operation of AC machines, Eur. J. Control, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 426435,
Sep. 2013.
[45] Z. Ma, Q.-C. Zhong, and J. Yan, Synchronverter-based control strategies
for three-phase PWM rectifiers, in Proc. 7th IEEE Conf. Ind. Electron.
Appl., Singapore, Jul. 2012, pp. 225230.
[46] Q.-C. Zhong, Z. Ma, and P.-L. Nguyen, PWM-controlled rectifiers with-
out the need of an extra synchronisation unit, in Proc. 38th Annu. Conf.
IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., Oct. 2012, pp. 691695.
[47] Q.-C. Zhong and D. Boroyevich, A droop controller is intrinsically a
phase-locked loop, in Proc. 39th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc.,
Vienna, Austria, Nov. 2013, pp. 59165921.
[48] Q.-C. Zhong and D. Boroyevich, Structural resemblance between droop
controllers and phase-locked loops, IEEE Access, vol. 4, pp. 57335741,
Sep. 2016.
[49] J. M. Guerrero, L. G. de Vicuna, J. Matas, M. Castilla, and J. Miret, Output
impedance design of parallel-connected UPS inverters with wireless load-
sharing control, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 11261135,
May 2005.
[50] Q.-C. Zhong, Robust droop controller for accurate proportional load
sharing among inverters operated in parallel, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 12811290, Apr. 2013.
[51] Q.-C. Zhong and Y. Zeng, Can the output impedance of an inverter be
designed capacitive? in Proc. 37th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron., Soc.,
Nov. 2011, pp. 12201225.
[52] Q.-C. Zhong and Y. Zeng, Control of inverters via a virtual capacitor
to achieve capacitive output impedance, IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 55685578, Oct. 2014.
[53] Q.-C. Zhong and Y. Zeng, Universal droop control of inverters with
different types of output impedance, IEEE Access, vol. 4, pp. 702712,
Jan. 2016.
[54] Q.-C. Zhong, W. L. Ming, and Y. Zeng, Self-synchronized universal
droop controller, IEEE Access, vol. 4, pp. 71457153, Oct. 2016.
[55] M. Karimi-Ghartemani and M. Iravani, A nonlinear adaptive filter for
online signal analysis in power systems: Applications, IEEE Trans. Power
Del., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 617622, Apr. 2002.
[56] M. Karimi-Ghartemani and M. Iravani, A new phase-locked loop (PLL)
system, in Proc. 44th IEEE Midwest Symp. Circuits Syst., 2001, pp. 421
424.
[57] A. K. Ziarani and A. Konrad, A method of extraction of nonstationary
sinusoids, Signal Process., vol. 84, no. 8, pp. 13231346, Apr. 2004.
[58] M. Karimi-Ghartemani and A. Ziarani, Periodic orbit analysis of two
dynamical systems for electrical engineering applications, J. Eng. Math.,
vol. 45, pp. 135154, 2003.
[59] C. K. Lee, N. R. Chaudhuri, B. Chaudhuri, and S. Y. R. Hui, Droop
control of distributed electric springs for stabilizing future power grid,
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 15581566, 2013.
Qing-Chang Zhong (M03SM04F17) re-
ceived the Ph.D. degree in control and power
engineering from Imperial College London, Lon-
don, U.K., in 2004 (awarded the Best Doctoral
Thesis Prize), and the Ph.D. degree in con-
trol theory and engineering from Shanghai Jiao
Tong University, Shanghai, China, in 2000.
He is the Max McGraw Endowed Chair in en-
ergy and power engineering at the Department
of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Illinois
Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, USA.
Prof. Zhong is a Distinguished Lecturer of the IEEE Power and Energy
Society, IEEE Power Electronics Society, and IEEE Control Systems So-
ciety. He is a Fellow of the Institution of Engineering and Technology
(IET), U.K., and the Vice-Chair of the IFAC Technical Committee on
Power and Energy Systems, and was a Senior Research Fellow of the
Royal Academy of Engineering, U.K. (20092010), and the U.K. Repre-
sentative to the European Control Association (20132015). He serves
as an Associate Editor of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CON-
TROL, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, IEEE TRANSAC-
TIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYS-
TEMS TECHNOLOGY, IEEE ACCESS, and IEEE JOURNAL OF EMERGING AND
SELECTED TOPICS IN POWER ELECTRONICS.