2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America).

Quito, Ecuador

Assessing the Performance of Smart Inverters in

Large-Scale Distribution Networks with PV Systems
M.J. Parajeles, J. Quirós-Tortós and G. Valverde
Electrical Power and Energy Research Laboratory
School of Electrical Engineering, University of Costa Rica
11501-2060 UCR, San José, Costa Rica
maria.parajelesherrera@ucr.ac.cr; jairoquirostortos@ieee.org; gustavo.valverde@ucr.ac.cr

Abstract—The emergence of clusters of rooftop Photovoltaic
(PV) systems in Distribution Networks (DNs) might result into
voltage rise that can exceed the voltage limits particularly in
secondary systems. This paper assesses the performance of two
smart inverter controllers (Volt-Watt and Volt-Var) to mitigate
these technical problems. A large-scale DN fully modeled in
OpenDSS is used in the assessment considering realistic load
profiles and irradiation for the area where the distribution
circuit is located. Four penetration levels of PV systems are
evaluated without and with smart inverters. Results demonstrate
that overreacting settings of Volt-Watt and Volt-Var controllers
can help reducing the magnitude of the problem; however, they
show that the reactive power consumed or active power curtailed
varies significantly among customers participating on voltage
regulation; thus highlighting that coordinated control actions are
needed in real DNs with thousands of customers.
Index Terms—Distributed generation, distribution networks, im-
pact studies, OpenDSS, power system simulation, photovoltaic
systems, smart inverters, volt-var control, volt-watt control.
I. I NTRODUCTION
For many years Distribution Networks (DNs) were consid-
ered passive with unidirectional power flows traveling from
substations to customer premises only. The biggest problem
faced by Distribution Network Operators (DNO) was the
correction or compensation of voltage drops along radial
distribution feeders. The latter was generally overcome by
installing voltage regulators, shunt capacitors and using off-
nominal tap positions of distribution transformers.
The installation of Distributed Generation (DG) at Medium
Voltage (MV) and Low Voltage (LV) systems is changing
the way DNs are planned and operated, as new technical
challenges arise: voltage rise, harmonics, flicker and increased
short circuit currents [1]. The particular case of rooftop
Photovoltaic (PV) systems, installed at customer premises, is
expected to result into voltage rise in LV systems [2].
Unlike utility-scale DG units, rooftop PV systems cannot
directly control voltage, their power output are not monitored
by the utility and they cannot be dispatched by the DNO. Ac-
cording to [3] and [4], the concentration of rooftop PV systems
in particular areas (also known as clusters) will lead to voltage
rise conditions that may violate the permitted voltage limits.
Unfortunately, classical equipment for voltage regulation at
MV level may not detect, and correct, voltage problems that
may arise in secondary systems, and this is worsen by time
delays of voltage regulators and switching capacitors which
cannot follow the rapid changes of PV systems.
Because of the aforementioned issues, there is an urgent
need to assess the technical challenges associated with the
integration of PV systems to propose cost-effective mitigation
measures. Among these measures, distributed control actions
such as PV disconnection, active power curtailment, power
factor modulation and smart inverters have been proposed
in the literature. For example, the authors in [5] present an
inverter-based voltage control that adjusts the inverters power
output as a function of terminal voltage. The work in [6]
presents droop-based active power curtailment techniques for
overvoltage prevention in a typical Canadian LV system.
Reference [7] illustrates the use of smart inverter’s con-
trollers in large PV systems installed close together in the
same region. However, different parameter settings and how
they affect each PV was not investigated.
This paper assesses the performance of two smart inverters
controllers, reported in [7] and available in OpenDSS [8], in a
large-scale DN with high penetration of PV systems. The PV
systems were sensibly allocated in the network based on an
economic study such that unrealistic penetration scenarios are
not evaluated. The main contributions of this paper are:
• Demonstrating that the settings of smart inverters may
greatly affect customers who participate on voltage reg-
ulation at secondary systems. This is, the application of
the same setting to all customers without considering their
location in the system may lead to unfair participation,
as the measures are not proportionally shared among all
the PV systems.
• Showing that these control functions may not be enough
to regulate voltages at secondary systems with high pen-
etration of rooftop PV systems. Hence, more coordinated
control actions among inverters may be required to fully
mitigate voltage rise problems at LV circuits.
The remaining of this paper is organized as follows: Sec-
tion II introduces the control functions of smart inverters used
in this work. Section III explains the methodology used to
define the location of the PV systems and the parameter
settings of the smart inverters, whereas Section IV presents
simulation results for different PV penetration levels in a real

978-1-5386-3312-0/17/$31.00 2017
c IEEE
 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador

(V1, P1) (V2, P2)

Active Power, p.u. (V1, Q1)

Reactive Power, p.u.

(V3, Q3)
(V2, Q2)

(V4, P4)
(V3, P3)
(V4, Q4)
Voltage Magnitude, p.u.
Voltage Magnitude, p.u.
Fig. 1: Generic curve of the Volt-Watt Control function.
Fig. 2: Generic curve of the Volt-Var Control function.
and large-scale DN in Costa Rica. Finally, key conclusions are
Modify
presented in Section V. functioni
Allocation of high
penetration of PVs No
II. VOLT-WATT AND VOLT-VAR C ONTROL
Small secondary Simulation using Is it the most
Smart inverters can help regulating voltages. Two control distribution circuit control functioni adequate one? Yes
Stage 1
approaches are evaluated in this work: Volt-Watt Controller
Stage 2
(VWC), which adjusts the active power output of the PV Daily simulation using Large-scale
chosen control function distibution network
systems, and Volt-Var Controller (VVC), which manages the
reactive power being consumed or injected by the PV. Analyze results:
OpenDSS is an open source DN simulator [8] that includes -High voltage problems solved
-Energy Curtailement (VWC)
these two controllers through the InvControl object. For any -Reactive Power Consumption (VVC)

of these, an iterative procedure is performed to compute the
action of the controller according to the voltage magnitude
until it reaches the permitted range of operation (or when the
inverter cannot change the terminal voltage any further).
The control actions are taken following a piece-wise func-
tion when the voltage changes [7]. For the VWC, the active
power output of the inverter is changed with the voltage
magnitude at the grid connection point. Similarly, the reactive
power consumption/injection in the VVC is related to the
voltage magnitude at the corresponding connection point.
The VWC follows the piece-wise function shown in Fig. 1,
where both the active power and the voltage magnitude are
defined in per unit values (pu), which are calculated using
the corresponding PV system maximum active power output
and the nominal voltage at the grid connection point. The x,y
points (Vi , Pi ) represent the set of voltage magnitude-active
power needed to characterize the controller in OpenDSS.
As shown in Fig. 1, the Volt/Watt control takes no action on
the active power output of the inverter if the voltage magnitude
at the connection point is below V2 . If the voltage is larger than
V2 , but smaller than V3 , the VWC will limit the active power
output using the following relationship PV33 −V−P1
. For voltages
1
higher than V3 , the VWC fully curtails the power output.
The behavior of the Volt-Var Control follows the piece-
wise function shown in Fig. 2. Reactive power can be injected
(capacitive behavior, when the terminal voltage is smaller than
V2 ) or consumed from the grid (inductive, when the terminal
voltage is larger than V3 ). Since PV systems can cause voltage
rise, this work focuses on the inductive part of the curve. As
shown in Fig. 2, the inverter remains idle until the voltage
Fig. 3: Methodology to evaluate performance of VWC and VVC.
magnitude at the connection point reaches V3 . From there until
V4 it consumes reactive power using the following relationship
Q4 −Q3
V4 −V3 . When the voltage is larger than V4 , the VVC will
absorb the maximum available reactive power. The reactive
power consumed (or injected) depends on the percentage of
available VArs (defined as the amount of headroom between
full kVA rating of the inverter and the active power output, in
kW, at any moment in time).
III. M ETHODOLOGY
This section presents the steps followed to evaluate the
performance of smart inverters in large-scale DNs. As depicted
in Fig. 3, the first stage is carried out in an isolated secondary
system, and it is used primarily to define the most adequate
settings of both the VWC and VVC. The second stage adopts
these settings in a large-scale DN with thousands of secondary
systems in presence of PV systems.
A. Performance Metrics
The performance of the VWC and VVC is assessed in terms
of three metrics: number of affected customers, daily energy
curtailment in VWC and reactive power consumption in VVC.
1) Quantification of voltage problems: This measure is
based on the Costa Rican power quality normative, better
known as AR-NT-SUCAL, which defines when a customer is
affected by voltage problems. The supply voltage magnitude
should be above 0.95 pu and below 1.05 pu to be considered
 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador
normal. A high voltage problem is detected when 5 % of
the measurements taken every 10 minutes, during a whole
week, are above 1.06 pu (tolerable limit), or when 2 or more
consecutive measurements are above this limit. A successful
voltage control is the one that significantly reduces the number
of customers with reported voltage problems.
2) Energy Curtailment: The energy curtailment metric
quantifies how much energy production is curtailed, with
respect to unrestricted generation, as a consequence of the
limitation of active power output performed by the VWC.
In the ideal case, the voltage problem should be corrected
at minimum energy curtailment. In addition, it is desired
that control efforts are proportionally shared (with respect to
inverter capacities) by all customers with PV systems.
3) Reactive Power Consumption: This metric quantifies
how much reactive power is drawn from the grid, with respect
to unity power factor operation of inverters, as a conse-
quence of the reactive power modulation performed by the
VVC. In the ideal case, the high (resp. low) voltage problem
should be corrected at minimum reactive power consumption
(resp. production). Note that reactive power consumption is
associated with higher losses in the network and requires
higher rating capacity of inverters. In the same way as for
energy curtailment, the reactive power consumption should be
proportionally shared among the customers with PV systems.
These three metrics are considered when simulating the
isolated secondary system and the large network.
B. PV and inverter model
The PV systems and the smart inverters are represented
by the PVSystem and the InvControl models available in
OpenDSS, respectively [9]. The PVSystem model is a sim-
plified representation of the PV and the inverter, as a whole.
This model considers the irradiation and PV’s surface temper-
ature as input parameters, along with the inverter’s efficiency
curve, the PV’s temperature-power output curve, the PV and
inverter’s nominal powers and the inverter’s nominal voltage.
The InvControl is the one that represents the smart features
of the inverter, as it modifies the active and reactive power
output of the PVSystem according to the VWC or the VVC.
C. Parameter Settings
Having in mind that voltage rise problems caused by rooftop
PV systems are localized problems, the VWC and VVC
parameters were defined by running a series of daily power
flow simulations of an isolated secondary system. The LV
system represents a typical residential circuit fed by a single
(split) phase transformer at 120/240 V . This circuit consists of
two phase and one neutral 3/0 AWG aluminum conductor in
an overhead vertical line spacing, and it serves 34 customers
connected through 2, 4 or 6 AWG triplex cables.
Each house was allocated with a PV system, equipped with
smart inverter, to build a high PV penetration scenario in the
secondary circuit. This scenario allows to better assess the
settings of both control functions in extreme conditions. As
depicted in Fig. 3, the slopes of the control functions were
VWC Function 1
VWC Function 2
1
Active Power Output, p.u.
0
1 1.03 1.05 1.06 1.1
Voltage Magnitude, p.u.
Fig. 4: Functions defined for the VWC.
modified in each simulation in order to find the parameters that
reduce voltage rise problems, PV generation curtailment (in
VWC) and inverter’s reactive power consumption (in VVC).
Figure 4 shows two piece-wise functions for VWC. Func-
tion 1 resulted to be the most adequate set of parameters in this
circuit with high PV generation. When the terminal voltage of
the inverter reaches 1.03 pu, the controller will curtail some
active power generation based on the slope shown in Fig. 4.
If the voltage reaches 1.06 pu, the smart inverter will fully
curtail the generation. This setting option reacts to voltage rise
before the maximum limit is reached. The idea is to anticipate
for problems before it is too late. This option is not reasonable
in secondary systems with very low penetration levels.
Function 2 represents an alternative, and less aggressive,
option aiming to act only when the voltage limit is violated.
This is, the inverter starts to curtail active power when the
terminal voltage is higher than the maximum allowed (i.e.
1.05 pu). Both functions will be used in the second stage of
this methodology for comparison purposes.
Figure 5 presents the VVC Functions 1 and 2. Function 1 is
the control setting with the best metrics in the secondary circuit
simulations. In this setting, the inverter starts to absorb reactive
power when the terminal voltage is greater than 1.02 pu. Note
that, similar as the VWC Function 1, this setting reacts to
voltage rise before the maximum limit is reached.
Function 2 represents an intuitive control setting, which
maintains a unity power factor operation when the terminal
voltage is within the normal band of operation (between 0.95
pu and 1.05 pu). However, the slope of this curve is more
aggressive than in Function 1. Both control settings will be
used in the large DN for comparison purposes.
D. PV Allocation in large circuit
As presented in Fig. 3, the second stage of this methodology
tests the performance of the control functions in a large-scale
DN. In order to present realistic scenarios, each PV penetration
 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador









 
 
   (a) 2 000 kW .


 
  

Fig. 5: Functions defined for the VVC.

level considers a sensible allocation of PV systems based on a

socio-economic study, valid for Costa Rica. This study results
in an optimal capacity and probability of installation for each
customer in the circuit.
The study carries out a cash flow to determine the PV
capacity that maximizes (resp. minimizes) the internal rate
of return IRR (resp. payback period) for different levels of
energy consumption and customer class. The estimation of the
payback period and IRR takes into consideration the initial in-
vestment values, the grid access fees and the electricity savings
(according to the PV production, the PV size calculated and
the monthly energy consumption of the customer).
Residential customers with very low montly energy con-
sumption (lower than 200 kW h per month) will not find
attractive to install a PV system as the price of electricity for
the energy block tariff they belong to is very cheap. For these
customers, the optimal capacity and probability of installation
was found to be zero. On the other hand, customers with very
high monthly energy consumption are the ones who will likely
find more interesting to substitute the kWh that belong to the
most expensive energy block tariffs.
The probability of installation p was calculated considering
the payback period for residential customers. It was assumed
that a customer with a payback period of 5 years or less
will have probability of installation of 100%, as the economic
benefit due to the installation of the PV is extremely high.
From there on, p will decay according to a quadratic curve
until it reaches 0%, when the payback period reaches 25 years
- the expected lifetime of the PV system.
The PV capacities assigned to customers with p = 0 were
in the range of 0.5 kW and 40 kW , in steps of 0.25 kW . The
allocation of PV systems in the circuit started in the customer
with the highest probability of installation and followed in de-
scending order until the desired penetration level was reached.
(b) 8 000 kW .
Fig. 6: Location of PV systems for two different penetration levels.
IV. C ASE S TUDY
A real DN in Costa Rica is simulated in OpenDSS to
illustrate the performance of the smart inverters. This 34.5 kV
circuit supplies to 26 395 customers (most residential ones),
and it covers over 80 km2 . The maximum demand of the
circuit without PV systems is about 17M W . The circuit was
built in OpenDSS from the Geographic Information System
of the local power utility, as explained in [2] and [10].
Four different penetration levels of rooftop PV systems are
considered: 2 000 kW , 4 000 kW , 6 000 kW and 8 000 kW .
Fig. 6 shows the topology of the circuit with the location of
the PV systems for two different penetration levels, Fig. 6a
for 2 000 kW and 6b for 8 000 kW . The allocation of the PV
systems in the circuit was defined according to the financial-
based allocation algorithm in Section III-D.
A series of base case simulations with all PV systems at
unity power factor was carried out for each penetration level.
Table I details the number of customers with voltage problems
(see section III-A for the metric). As expected, the greater the
PV penetration, the greater the number of affected customers.
Once the effects of each PV penetration level is known,
 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador

Table I: Number of affected customers in the large-scale DN.

Table III: Daily energy curtailment resulting from VWC function 1.
Penetration level, kW Affected customers
− Energy curtailment
2 000 1 Penetration level, kW 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000
4 000 23
6 000 164 Maximum, kWh 22.50 47.98 58.06 72.53
8 000 392 Maximum, % 17.41 43.68 52.12 61.90
Average, % 4.02 6.29 8.34 9.89
Standard deviation, % 3.13 7.56 11.12 14.07
Table II: Performance of Function 1 of VWC and VVC.

Penetration Affected customers using: % corrected customers

level, kW VWC VVC VWC VVC
Table IV: Consumption of VArs resulting from VVC Function 1.

2 000 1 1 0.00 0.00 − Reactive power consumption

4 000 12 8 47.83 65.22
6 000 32 62 80.49 62.20 Penetration level, kW 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000
8 000 36 100 90.82 74.49 Maximum, kVAR 4.29 4.69 4.93 5.50
Maximum, % 21.46 25.65 28.75 30.65
Average, % 0.84 1.33 1.57 2.94
Standard deviation, % 1.72 2.40 2.74 2.94
the VWC and VVC are activated for each PV system in the
circuit. The following sub-sections describe the results.
20
A. Performance of VWC and VVC using Function 1
18
The study first assesses the benefits of using Function 1 (the
one with the best results in the small secondary system) for 16
the VWC and VVC. Table II highlights that the VWC and the 14
VVC are both effective in reducing the voltage problems in Active Power, kW
this circuit. On average, the percentage of corrected problems 12

using the VWC and the VVC was 73.0 % and 67.3 %, re- 10
spectively. For the largest PV penetration, it can be noted that
8
the adoption of the VWC results into more corrected problems
(90.82 %); the reduction achieved by the VVC is slightly lower 6
74.49 %. While this is beneficial for the network, there is an
4
impact on customers as the PV generation is being curtailed.
Table III shows that the larger the penetration level, the more 2
curtailment is required to mitigate voltage problems. For the
0
largest PV penetration, the maximum daily energy curtailment 0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
is 61.22 % (with respect to unconstrained generation of the Time, h
same PV). This indicates that some customers are considerably Fig. 7: Power curtailment in some of the PV systems.
more affected by the adoption of the VWC. Table III also
presents the standard deviation to demonstrate that some
customers are participating more in the voltage regulation
(the standard deviation is greater than the average value). 20

For illustration purposes, Fig. 7 presents the power output of

some PV systems in the 8 000 kW penetration level; the power
Reactive Power, kVAR | Active Power kW

15
output in some PV systems is curtailed more often than others.
It has also been found that the VWC may curtail PV gen-
eration without solving the voltage problem. For a 2 000 kW 10
penetration level, Table III shows that an average daily energy
curtailment of 4.02 %, and a maximum of 17.14 %, has been
required, although Table II reported that the percentage of 5
corrected problems was 0. This behavior indicates that more
aggressive control settings might be needed; this, however, will
have a greater impact on customers (larger curtailment). 0

The reactive power consumed by the inverters under VVC

Function 1 is shown in Table IV for each penetration level.
-5
In general, the larger the penetration, the larger the VAr 0:00 6:00 12:00 18:00 00:00
consumption. Table IV also highlights that the maximum Time, h
percentage of VAr consumption (30.65 %, i.e. a minimum Fig. 8: Reactive power consumption in some of the PV systems.
power factor of 0.96, with respect to the installed capacity
 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference - Latin America (ISGT Latin America). Quito, Ecuador

Table V: Performance of Function 2 of VWC and VVC. Table VII: Consumption of VArs resulting from VVC Function 2.

Penetration Affected customers using: % corrected customers − Reactive power consumption

level, kW VWC VVC VWC VVC Penetration level, kW 2 000 4 000 6 000 8 000
2 000 1 1 0 0 Maximum, kVAR 1.86 3.01 4.87 7.43
4 000 23 16 0 30.43 Maximum, % 9.30 15.07 29.97 42.14
6 000 141 100 14.02 39.02 Average, % 0.04 0.12 0.3 0.41
8 000 322 163 17.86 58.42 Standard deviation, % 0.20 0.42 0.91 1.15

Table VI: Daily energy curtailment using Function 2.

− Energy curtailment
Penetration level, kW 2 000 4 000 6 000
Maximum, kWh 4.18 4.36 17.72
Maximum, % 3.01 3.9 17.99
Average, % 3.01 3.02 3.27
Standard deviation, % 0.011 0.077 1.42
of the inverter) was needed for the largest PV penetration
level. The standard deviation indicates that some inverters
are consuming more reactive power than others. Indeed, the
maximum percentage of deviation is 2.94 % with respect to
the average percentage of reactive power drawn from grid. For
illustration purposes, Fig. 8 shows the active power output and
the reactive power consumption of some PV systems under
VVC control, for a PV penetration of 8 000 kW .
B. Performance of VWC and VVC using Function 2
In order to understand the benefits or limitations of different
VWC and VVC settings, this section adopts Function 2,
and the corresponding parameters of each control type. It
must be remembered that the settings defined for Function
2 were based on the Costa Rican regulation (AR-NT-SUCAL
normative) and they make the VWC and VVC more corrective
instead of preventive (Function 1).
Table V shows that Function 2 is less effective on solving
the technical problems caused by the PV systems. Indeed, the
greater percentage of corrected problems was 58.42 % using
the VVC (lower than those shown in Table II). However,
the daily energy curtailment obtained using VWC Function
2 (see Table VI) is much lower in all cases. This, in turn,
demonstrates that a careful selection of the settings of a VWC
must be done to minimize the number of customers with
voltage problems, but also to minimize the effect on customers
in terms of daily energy curtailment.
Finally, and in terms of consumption of VArs, Table VII
shows that Function 2 leads to a lower absorption of reactive
power. This, however, results in more technical problems on
the DN as the number of reported affected customers in higher.
Thus, and similar to the previous case, it can be concluded that
conservative settings can reduce the effects on customers (less
energy curtailment and less VAr consumption), but voltage
problems will remain.
V. C ONCLUSION
Clusters of rooftop Photovoltaic systems in large-scale dis-
tribution networks are likely to result into significant voltage
problems, which can be mitigated in the context of smart grids
using the capabilities of smart PV inverters.
8 000
This paper has assessed the performance of two smart
25.17 inverters controllers: Volt-Watt and Volt-Var with respect to
23.81
3.49 traditional inverter operation. A large-scale DN fully modeled
2.09 in OpenDSS was used while considering realistic load profiles
and irradiation. Four PV penetration levels were evaluated, and
the corresponding PV locations were carefully defined in the
circuit based on an economic study. This has avoided assessing
unrealistic scenarios.
Simulation results have been carried out considering two
different functions for each controller: Function 1, designed
to prevent problems, presents the best results but affects
more customers due to higher energy curtailment and reactive
power consumption; and Function 2, which operates in a more
corrective approach, results in less effects on customers but
leads to more technical problems in the network.
The results demonstrated that overreacting settings of Volt-
Watt and Volt-Var controllers can almost mitigate the technical
problems posed by the PV systems; however, they showed that
the active power curtailed or the reactive power consumed
varies significantly among customers participating on voltage
regulation; thus highlighting that coordinated control actions
are needed in real DNs with thousands of customers.
R EFERENCES
[1] I. J. T. F. on Quadrennial Energy Review (QER), “Final IEEE Report
to DOE QER on Priority Issues,” Tech. Rep., Sept. 2014.
[2] J. Quirós-Tortós, G. Valverde, A. Argüello, and L. Ochoa, “Geo-
Information Is Power: Using Geographical Information Systems to
Assess Rooftop Photovoltaics in Costa Rica,” IEEE Power & Energy
Magazine, vol. 15, no. 2, March-April 2017.
[3] M. J. E. Alam, K. M. Muttaqi, and D. Sutanto, “A SAX-Based Advanced
Computational Tool for Assessment of Clustered Rooftop Solar PV
Impacts on LV and MV Networks in Smart Grid,” IEEE Trans. on Smart
Grid, vol. 4, no. 1, Mar. 2013.
[4] A. Hoke, R. Butler, and J. Hambrick, “Steady-State Analysis of Maxi-
mum Photovoltaic Penetration Levels on Typical Distribution Feeders,”
IEEE Trans. on Sust. Energy, vol. 4, no. 2, Apr. 2013.
[5] M. Bollen and A. Sannino, “Voltage Control with Inverter-Based Dis-
tributed Generators,” IEEE Trans. on Pow. Del., vol. 20, no. 1, Jan.
2005.
[6] R. Tonkoski, L. Lopes, and T. El-Fouly, “Coordinated Active Power Cur-
tailment of Grid Connected PV Inverters for Overvoltage Prevention,”
IEEE Trans. on Sustainable Energy, vol. 2, no. 2, Apr. 2011.
[7] W. Sunderman, R. C. Dugan, and J. Smith, “Open Source Modeling of
Advanced Inverter Functions for Solar Photovoltaic Installations,” 2014
IEEE PES T&D Conference and Exposition, Apr. 2014.
[8] R. Dugan and T. McDermott, “An open source platform for collaborating
on smart grid research,” IEEE PES General Meeting, Jul. 2011.
[9] Electric Power Research Institute, “OpenDSS PVSystem Element
Model,” Tech. Rep., Feb. 2011.
[10] G. Valverde, A. Argüello, G. Gonzáles, and J. Quirós-Tortós, “Inte-
gration of Open Source Tools for Studying Large-Scale Distribution
Networks,” IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, Jan. 2017.