Smart Grid Handbook Control and Management Architectures PDF

Control and Management Architectures
Manuel A. Matos1 , Luís Seca2 , André G. Madureira2 , Filipe J. Soares2 , Ricardo J.

Bessa2 , Jorge Pereira3 , and João Peças Lopes1
1 Faculdade de Engenharia Universidade do Porto and INESC TEC, Porto, Portugal
2 INESC Technology and Science (INESC TEC), Porto, Portugal
3 Faculdade de Economia Universidade do Porto and INESC TEC, Porto, Portugal
1 Introduction
1.1 General Context
Electric power systems have evolved considerably in the past years due to an increase in variable renewable
power sources in the generation mix, exploiting medium- and small-size distributed energy resources (DER),
typically below 10 MW per unit. In this move from a paradigm of centralized large-scale generation units
to decentralized renewable-based small-scale generation units, electricity generation has been accompanied
by a user-centric approach, where consumers are being empowered and becoming more conscious to make
decisions about the profile of their electricity consumption. Several home energy management systems are
already in the market and have shown good results in providing awareness and control to end users. These
internal submetering systems are complementary to the load meter used by utilities to determine overall
building consumption, and allow end users to have visibility into and control over the energy use and per-
formance of individual circuits/equipment, creating opportunities for energy and capital expenditure savings.
These systems are, however, not visible for distribution system operators (DSO) or even retailers, being the
certified global energy meter and the only interface to the electricity distribution grid. This limitation is being
nevertheless overcome through the development and installation of advanced home energy meters by the
utilities, a bit all over the world. In Europe, for example, the Measuring Instruments Directive – 2004/22/CE
is leveraging an improvement on the knowledge that DSO have about their system. These devices have been
developed and significantly enhanced in recent years, implementing additional functionalities besides the
mandatory regulatory measuring leading to a more complete and active grid component called Smart Meter.
The smart meter, besides providing automated meter reading, can also support a more effective engage-
ment with consumers, namely, if DSO ICT (information and communication technology) infrastructure is
used to send control signals (as an alternative to third-party Internet connection) to activate prior negotiated
Smart Grid Handbook, Online © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Smart Grid Handbook in 2016 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
2 Smart Grid Handbook
flexibility, either directly through bilateral contracts or alternatively through market negotiation by energy
retailers. The meter will, in this case, serve as a gateway for bidirectional communication between distri-
bution network and home/building energy management systems, enabling the emergence of an extended
smart grid.
On the other hand, the electrical generation diversity and the increased interactivity of the distribution
grids require a completely different attitude from DSO and transmission system operators (TSO). System
operators have already understood the need to gradually introduce changes in their systems, namely, through
the installation of new monitoring and control functionalities capable of dealing with the management of
the grid and generating systems embedded in households and/or buildings.
These technological changes led to the conceptualization of new control and management architectures
to support network operation, such as microgrids, multi-microgrids, smart metering infrastructures, and
so on, in order to allow integrating DER such as including medium voltage (MV) distributed generation
(DG), electric vehicles (EV) and dispersed stationary storage devices. Furthermore, they have also required
the development of new models for components (namely, by considering the presence of new types of
small generation devices with power electronic interfaces), new monitoring and control schemes, decision
and control mechanisms and communication architectures, evaluation tools and market integration models,
including new remuneration schemes.
1.2 Literature Overview

Electric energy supply has been dominated in the past decades by large-scale centralized generation based on
fossil fuel (coal, oil, and gas) and nuclear and hydro power plants, electricity being delivered to consumers
over long distances.
Wind generators, photovoltaic (PV) solar panels, fuel cells and microturbines – just to mention a few – are
new emerging technologies for electricity generation. They include renewable energy sources (RES) and
involve the exploitation of distributed resources through the concept of DG. Today, wind power and dis-
tributed combined heat and power (CHP) are entering into a competitive level with traditional forms of
electricity generation. Microgeneration (microturbines, micro CHP, PV systems and fuel cells) are becoming
mature and they are changing the electric power system infrastructure.
Large-scale utilization of RES has the potential to become the foundation of a future more sustainable
energy supply system, leading to CO2 emission reduction (directly and through losses reduction) and cost
savings. Their large-scale deployment will transform the energy landscape from a system dominated by the
centralized generation with a strong contribution from combustion of fossil fuel units to a new one in which
environment-friendly new technologies will contribute to a sustainable development. On the other hand, DG
can offer additional value to the grid system operators by providing:
• Deferral of investments in transmission and distribution systems;

• Reduction of losses in the distribution system;
• Increased reliability;
• Provision of network support services or ancillary services.
However, the integration of both RES and DG into the overall power systems operation requires that they
can no longer be considered as a passive appendage. Reliability, safety, and quality of power are the main
issues linked to large-scale deployment of DER so that their effect on the transmission and distribution
networks cannot be neglected. This requires innovative regulatory policies that promote the smooth change
of paradigm.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
Control and Management Architectures 3
One of the key drivers in the change that affect the way how electric power systems are managed and
operated is directly related to the progressive integration of DG sources in power distribution systems, mostly
at the high-voltage (HV, ∼50–150 kV) and MV (∼20 kV) levels (Peças Lopes et al., 2007). More recently,
the connection of dispersed energy sources directly at the low-voltage (LV, ∼400 V), near to the main con-
sumption sites, is already becoming a reality. DG is regarded as a way to exploit geographically dispersed
RES, usually based on wind or solar.
The main characteristic of this type of units is that the energy generated is variable and, therefore, it is a
source of noncontrollable electrical power. This fact poses significant challenges to network operation, as
managing a distribution system with a large amount of noncontrollable sources that originate variable power
injections and reverse power flows is increasingly difficult.
In fact, large-scale integration of renewable-based DG and particularly microgeneration at the LV level
may bring technical problems to distribution systems. DG may cause voltage problems [such as voltage rise
(Masters, 2002)], which may require upgrading the distribution transformers and corresponding conductors
and the renovation of the LV network. These actions will increase the amount of investment on the LV
network. Also, the injection of significant amounts of power in distribution networks may cause reverse
power flows, which, in very specific situations (like low-load scenarios), may result even in increasing branch
congestions and system losses. In addition, the type of DG unit has an effect on the power quality, fault
currents, and controlling solutions of the LV network (Löf, 2012).
Furthermore, the concept of DER has emerged, including not only DG but also storage devices and demand
response (DR), in order to enhance system operation and allow further expansion of DG.
Storage is a crucial element for balancing the variability of RES, being able to allow DG to operate at an
approximately stable output power, to provide energy during periods when DG primary resource is not avail-
able and to enable dispatching nondispatchable DG units due to the compensation of the primary resource
variability.
DR can help shift load to the periods when RES are available or from peak hours to valley hours, granting
better prices for consumers and facilitating the grid operation for the system operator. These processes were
already characteristics of demand-side management (DSM) strategies, but in the smart grid context load
flexibility has a higher operational value due to bidirectional communication possibility.
On the other hand, with the expected change in the mobility paradigm, the foreseen increase in the connec-
tion of EV to distribution networks will cause changes in load profiles (Peças Lopes, Soares, and Almeida,
2011). EV can be regarded as a new type of load with high flexibility but a type that requires significant
amounts of power in order to charge their batteries.
The deployment of DER in distribution networks – including DG units, loads under DR, EV or stationary
storage systems – requires a change from a traditionally passive approach into a fully active approach. In this
context, active network management can be regarded as a way to achieve cost-effective solutions following
DER integration in distribution grids at both the planning and operation stages of the distribution system
(Djapic et al., 2007).
Control over the several DER is essential in order to overcome some of the technical problems that may
arise (such as poor voltage profiles or branch congestion) and also to be able to profit from some advantages
of these resources regarding network operation. Network control is a rather complex issue that requires the
development of specific and dedicated solutions.
The research projects successfully developed under the Target Action “Integration of Renewable Energies
and Distributed Generation in European Electricity Networks” in EU 5th Framework Programme (FP5)
are considered as the starting point for the development of the first generation of new architectures for
electricity grids. The EU cluster IRED involved seven projects dealing with the integration of RES and
DG. The MicroGrids project (Large Scale Integration of MicroGeneration to Low Voltage Grids, Contract
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
ENK5-CT-2002-00610) was one of them and was the first attempt at EU level to deal in-depth with
MicroGrids.
Activities in this area have continued in FP6 with very promising large integrated projects, in which more
and more utilities and other stakeholders in the electricity sector, usually competitors in the international
market, showed their readiness to share knowhow and efforts as in the More-MicroGrids Project (Con-
tract No. 019864 (SES6)). In this, project new grid architectures for the integration of DER within local
distribution networks, including MicroGrids, were developed.
The EU Commission proposal for FP7, within the theme energy, confirms power networks and DG as a
priority for future research activities. The research area identified as “Smart Energy Networks” is the natural
evolution of both past and current R&D activities on integration of DER. Thus, the objective of this area
was to increase the efficiency and reliability of the European electricity and gas systems and networks, for
example, by transforming the current grids into an interactive (customers/operators) service network, and
to remove the technical barriers to the large-scale deployment and effective integration of DER.
Several FP6 and FP7 projects tackled the topic, namely, by exploring a key enabler of this transformational
process that is ICT infrastructure, including the definition of different reference architectures and monitoring
and control functionalities. Some examples of these projects are (the Ref. of each project is the Project
Reference in the CORDIS platform and more information is available on cordis.europa.eu):
• FENIX – “Flexible electricity networks to integrate the expected energy evolution,” Ref.: 518272 (http://
cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/75906_en.html)
• Adine – “Active distribution network,” Ref.: 38533 (http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/85682_en.html)
• ADDRESS – “Active Distribution networks with full integration of Demand and distributed energy
RESourceS,” Ref.: 207643 (http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/100636_en.html)
• INTEGRIS – “INTelligent Electrical Grid Sensor communications,” Ref.: 247938 (http://cordis.europa
.eu/project/rcn/93726_en.html)
• SuSTAINABLE – “Smart Distribution System OperaTion for MAximizing the INtegration of Renew-
ABLE Generation,” Ref.: 308755 (http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/106534_en.html)
• EVOLVDSO – “Development of methodologies and tools for new and evolving DSO roles for efficient
DRES integration in distribution networks,” Ref.: 608732 (http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/109548_
en.html)
On the H2020 programme, the topic of smart grids continued to be a relevant topic on the agenda, par-
ticularly through the so-called Research and Innovation Actions (RIA), which support large demonstrators
where the smart grid operation paradigm is intended to be validated. Some of the most recently approved
projects include all the relevant stakeholders (manufacturers, IT providers, ICT operators, DSO, R&D insti-
tutions, end users’ associations) showing a clear commitment on the short-term implementation of this new
operation paradigm. As examples we can mention:
• UPGRID – “Real proven solutions to enable active demand and DG flexible integration, through a fully
controllable LOW Voltage and medium voltage distribution grid,” Ref.: 646531 (http://cordis.europa.eu/
project/rcn/194452_en.html)
• SENSIBLE – “Storage-Enabled Sustainable Energy for Buildings and Communities,” Ref.: 645963
(http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/194405_en.html)
In the UPGRID project, in particular, two alternative architectures are tested. One is based on a hierarchical
approach, which is detailed in Section 4, and an alternative based on Internet of things (IoT), where all the
involved agents will have real-time communication and feed advanced distribution management systems
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
(DMS), particularly for the management of LV grids with high levels of integration of RES. The project will
allow a cost–benefit analysis on both alternatives, by including one of the major impacts of this decentralized
approach that is the size of the system.
The large number of EU projects and pilots that have been developed all over Europe shows the commit-
ment of all stakeholders to develop and test more advanced systems/solutions that can deal with this new
distribution network operation.
1.3 Aims and Structure of this Chapter

Our overall objective is to present a comprehensive analysis on the evolution that distribution network mon-
itoring and control has had over the past years, namely, due to the large-scale integration of RES in the MV
and LV level that leveraged significant developments both on academic and technological levels.
The rest of this chapter is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the conceptual frameworks that lead to
different architectures for electrical power systems and describes relevant commercial solutions offered by
manufacturers. In Section 3, practical implementations based on the smart grid concept in different regions
and countries are listed, along with their main features. Details of a possible implementation of a specific
control architecture, including relevant functionalities, are presented in Section 4. Finally, Section 5 draws
the main conclusions and points out open issues in this theme.
2 Conceptual Frameworks
2.1 Main Tendencies
In this section, an overview of the existing distribution system control architecture is presented and it is
independent from the region of the world. From the classical vertical and centralized management to decen-
tralized multiagent-based system, the main characteristics and rationale are highlighted.
2.1.1 Centralized Architecture

Traditionally, power systems have been organized in a purely centralized way, which consisted in three
different levels: generation, transmission, and distribution. The generation level is characterized by large
generators that rely mostly on three types of technologies: hydro units, thermal units based on fossil fuels,
or nuclear units. These generators are dispatched by the market mechanism, such as a centralized market pool
in Europe or a unit commitment/economic dispatch in the United States, and also contribute to frequency
control and automatic voltage regulation. These large central generators would feed electrical power through
generator transformers to an extra high voltage (EHV) or HV transmission system. This transmission system,
which would often cover large distances at HV levels, was then used to transport the electrical power that
would be finally delivered to the final customers through distribution transformers (Jenkins, Ekanayake, and
Strbac, 2010).
However, the recent technological advances and social acceptance that led to a dramatic growth of DG
brings considerable challenges and requires significant changes in the way power systems are regarded
at many levels, namely, at the level of operation and planning. Furthermore, additional flexibility in the
system, such as controllable loads through DSM actions and storage devices, will contribute to change the
paradigm from passive to fully active. In order to support this change, new distribution system architectures
are required because purely centralized control is beginning to get outdated.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
2.1.2 Hierarchical Architectures

In order to facilitate the integration of DER located at the different voltage levels, for instance, DG connected
to HV and MV networks and microgeneration units connected to LV networks, hierarchical management
architectures can be used.
The FP5 EU project MICROGRIDS (Large Scale Integration of MicroGeneration to Low Voltage Grids)
proposed a hierarchical control architecture for LV microgrids. The concept of microgrid, initially developed
within the CERTS (Consortium for Electric Reliability Technology Solutions) in the United States (Lasseter
et al., 2002), envisaged an aggregation of loads and microgeneration units operating as a single system
providing both power and heat (Lasseter et al., 2002; Lasseter, 2002). In Peças Lopes and Saraiva (2003),
a microgrid is defined as an LV distribution system to which small modular systems are connected. In
this context, a microgrid corresponds to an association of electrical loads and small generation systems
through an LV distribution network, which means that loads and sources are physically close. Apart from an
LV distribution network, microgeneration units and electrical loads, a microgrid may also include storage
devices, network control and management systems, and heat recovery systems such as CHP applications.
The architecture of the microgrid concept as developed in the FP5 EU project MICROGRIDS is shown
in Figure 1 (Hatziargyriou et al., 2004).
At a first hierarchical level, the microgrid is managed by a MicroGrid Central Controller (MGCC),
installed on the LV side of the MV/LV secondary substation. The MGCC includes a set of control and
management functionalities and can be regarded as an interface between the microgrid and the main
distribution network. At a second hierarchical level, each microgeneration unit and storage device is
locally controlled by a microsource controller (MC) and each electrical load is locally controlled by a load
controller (LC).
In order to ensure an efficient operation of the global system, communication between these two sets of
devices is required because the LC and MC serve as interfaces to control loads (through the application of
PV Flywheel
MC AC
DC
DC
LC
AC
MC MC AC
DC
LC Storage
LC
MC
~ CHP
DMS MV LV
MC Fuel cell
AC
MGCC
DC
MC
AC
LC
DC
~
Micro turbine
Figure 1 Microgrid architecture. Source: Reproduced from Hatziargyriou, N., Tsikalakis, A., Vlachogiannis, J., et al.
(2004) MICROGRIDS EU Project
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
an interruptibility concept) and microgeneration active and reactive power production levels, respectively,
and the MGCC works as a central controller that promotes adequate technical and management policies by
providing set points to both LC and MC. Simultaneously, it is expected that the MGCC will establish com-
munication with the DMS, located at the central systems’ level of the distribution system, thus contributing
to an improvement in the management and operation of the whole distribution grid (Peças Lopes, Moreira,
and Madureira, 2006; Peças Lopes et al., 2013a; Peças Lopes, Madureira, and Moreira, 2013b). Finally, the
MGCC is also responsible for the control of the microgrid in isolated mode.
This architecture was extended to the MV network level within FP6 EU project MORE MICROGRIDS
(Advanced Architectures and Control Concepts for More MicroGrids), which propose the concept of a
multi-microgrid system. The multi-microgrid consists of a high-level structure, formed at the MV level,
consisting of LV microgrids and DG units directly connected to the MV level on several adjacent feeders.
For the purpose of grid control and management, microgrids, DG units, and MV loads under active DSM
control can be considered as active cells in this new type of network (Peças Lopes et al., 2013a; Peças Lopes,
Madureira, and Moreira, 2013b).
The proposed hierarchical architecture added a new control layer at the HV/MV primary substation level,
where a new management agent – the Central Autonomous Management Controller (CAMC) – that accom-
modates a set of functionalities for managing MV networks normally assigned to the DMS (as well as
other new functionalities) and that will be responsible for interfacing the DMS with lower level controllers
(namely, the MGCC) was included (Madureira et al., 2011). The architecture of the multi-microgrid concept
as developed in the FP6 EU project MORE MICROGRIDS is shown in Figure 2.
One of the most important features of multi-microgrid systems is the use of individual controllers, which
have a certain degree of autonomy and are able to communicate with each other in order to implement
specific control actions. This is justified by the tremendous increase in both dimension and complexity of
the system so that the management of a multi-microgrid system requires the use of a more flexible control
and management architecture. On the other hand, decision making should still hold a hierarchical structure;
therefore, a central controller should collect data from multiple devices and be able to establish rules for
lower level controllers.
Ultimately, this type of hierarchical control architecture has been adapted and enhanced, giving origin to
the InovGrid project, which was developed and implemented in a smart grid pilot in Évora, Portugal – the
InovCity. The InovGrid project has been selected as a reference project in the smart grids area by the Joint
Research Committee (JRC) of the European Commission (EC) has also been selected by JRC/Eurelectric/EC
as the single case study for test and validation of the EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) Business Case
assessment methodology (Giordano, Gangale, and Fulli, 2011; Giordano et al., 2012). The architecture of
the InovGrid project is shown in Figure 3.
The structure of the InovGrid architecture follows closely the hierarchy of physical distribution systems
(Godinho Matos et al., 2013). The approach covers the whole distribution system and the control layers
correspond to the main voltage levels from the HV grid down to the LV consumers, thus defining the hier-
archy of control and management. In Gouveia et al. (2015), this reference architecture is described. At the
top level, the central systems’ level, where the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)/DMS is
in charge of managing the whole distribution network through two intermediate control layers:
• One control layer located at the HV/ MV primary substation level, where a Smart Substation Controller
(SSC) manages the MV network using a set of control functionalities, taking advantage of several DER
directly connected at the MV level;
• One control layer located at the MV/LV secondary substation level with a Distribution Transformer Con-
troller (DTC) that is in charge of managing the LV network, namely, a set of LV prosumers (clients that
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
DMS
HV HV
RTU RTU CAMC
CAMC
MV MV
~
DG
MGCC
MGCC
LV
~
LV DG
MGCC LV
Figure 2 Multi-microgrid architecture. Source: Reproduced with permission from Lopes, 2013b © Wiley
not only consume energy but also generate energy using microgeneration) via the corresponding smart
meters (EDP Box).
In this architecture, the SSC accommodates a set of advanced functionalities and computational capabil-
ities for MV grids that will allow sending optimal set points to DG units and other controllable network
devices. Similarly, the LV grid is controlled by the DTC that is responsible for managing the DER at the LV
level and the smart meters associated with consumers and microgeneration sources are used as interfaces
not only to monitor but also to control the distributed resources.
The FP7 EU project DREAM (distributed renewable resources exploitation in electric grids through
advanced heterarchical management) proposed a “heterarchical” approach, that is, a self-created and
ever-changing hierarchy depending on topology and current operational constraints that considers several
operation modes (such as normal, congested/abnormal, contingency) with automatic, smooth transitioning
and no interaction between them. Moreover, this heterarchical architecture is adopted in order to pursue full
local autonomy in which the global information is minimized, or even eliminated, for a very large amount
of actors (Caire et al., 2013).
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
InovGrid reference technical architecture
Central Services Oriented Architecture (SOA)
Electrical grid Distribution

Metering and System
management Stakeholders
infrastructure systems
energy data information
management services
(DMS)
PT
WAN
GPRS,
MV/LV Substation ADSL, …
Local Control
(sensors, DTC DTC
MV/LV MV/LV
controllers, …) Internet
PLC, GPRS, …
LAN LAN
PLC, GPRS, …
Interface
Consumer WAN – Wide area network
Local devices
LAN – Local area network
(sensors, meters, HAN EB EB EB EB HAN – Home area network
controllers, home
automation, …) ZigBee, …
Human Interface
Local Remote
interaction interaction
Consumer/ Producer
Figure 3 InovGrid architecture. Source: Reproduced by permission of EDP Distribuição
The main difference when comparing a hierarchical control strategy with a purely centralized one is the
use of individual controllers, which have a certain degree of autonomy and are able to communicate with
each other in order to implement certain control actions. A partially decentralized scheme is justified by
the tremendous increase in both dimension and complexity of the distribution system so that an effective
management structure should benefit from the use of a more flexible control and management architecture.
Nevertheless, decision making, even with some degree of decentralized control, can still adhere to a hierar-
chical structure. A central controller should collect data from multiple devices and be able to establish rules
for low-rank individual controllers. These actions must be set by a high-level central controller (i.e., the
DMS), which ought to delegate some tasks in other lower level controllers, due to the fact that a central
management would not be effective because of the large amount of data to be processed.
2.1.3 Decentralized Architectures

An alternative to the hierarchical architecture discussed in the previous section is the use of multi-agent
systems (MAS), constructed with agent-based technology from Artificial Intelligence. MAS can be used
for several power engineering applications as they have specific characteristics that are well suited for some
issues such as distributed control (McArthur et al., 2007a,b). In fact, with the introduction of DER, market
operation, and so on, the complexity of the power system grows considerably. MAS are able to deliver a
technology to flexibly control modern power systems because it can provide intelligent, fast, and adapt-
able local control and decision-making capabilities (McArthur et al., 2007b). Applications of MAS include
power system restoration, active distribution networks operation, and virtual power plant (VPP) control
(Hernández et al., 2013).
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
MAS is one paradigm that employs active elements in the distribution grid with local intelligence and that
communicates/cooperates with each other in order to optimize a global objective function. Each autonomous
agent also has a local objective function and can be hosted in different grid components, such as flexible
loads, storage, DG, switcher, on-load tap-changing (OLTC) transformers, and so on.
In Baran and El-Markabi (2007) a MAS scheme was proposed to solve an optimization problem that
dispatches DG for voltage support in distribution feeders. The authors state that the characteristics of the
MAS approach may facilitate plug-and-play integration of DG and the approach is able to coordinate reactive
power dispatch among DG units to provide voltage support. In addition, communication requirements are
also assessed and said to be quite modest. A survey of the communication requirements for smart grids,
which includes the MAS paradigm, can be found in Wang, Xu, and Khanna (2011).
In Zhabelova and Vyatkin (2012), an automation system architecture is proposed for the industrial deploy-
ment of MAS in network-embedded control devices. The system is based on the concept of intelligent logical
nodes (ILN) used in substation automation, upgraded with agents that act independently at the local level
and collaborate to optimize the system. Two standards are considered: (i) IEC 61499 to embed and imple-
ment the intelligent control agents; (ii) IEC 61850 to define open communication and object-oriented data
model for the control devices in substation automation. It is demonstrated, via a simulation environment,
how ILN can be used for “self-healing” of the grid without any central controller. However, the proposed
solution can accommodate other smart grid functions, such as voltage control.
The FP7 EU Project INCREASE (increasing the penetration of renewable energy sources in the distri-
bution grid by developing control strategies and using ancillary services) adopted a MAS-based smart grid
architecture (Chrysochos et al., 2014). The MAS technology is mainly devoted to the overlay (middleware
layer) and scheduling control (services layer) algorithms. The overlay control consists in MAS coordination
algorithms for the application of specific voltage control and branch congestion management strategies, able
to change the droop parameters and set points of local controllers (located in each controllable DRES unit).
The scheduling control is focused on minimizing loss, respecting technical constraints, and maximizing
DRES generation. It should be stressed that despite the distributed control, a hierarchical architecture is also
considered for the upstream level because an aggregator of the agents is also considered.
In comparison to centralized control, the use of MAS technology encompasses several advantages for
power system operation (Dimeas and Hatziargyriou, 2004; Zhabelova and Vyatkin, 2012):
• Centralized control does not take into account several decisions that should be taken locally because
DG and DER units have different owners, such as maximizing self-consumption or guarantee end-user
comfort levels (in case of DR programs).
• There is flexibility of integrating different functions/objectives, as well as equipment from different man-
ufacturers, and combining them according to the internal and system state;
• There is a lack of dedicated communication facilities.
• Given that DER and DG are expected to operate in a liberalized market, controller decisions for each
device concerning the market should have a certain degree of “intelligence.”
In Dimeas and Hatziargyriou (2005), the benefits from the MAS decentralized control approach to central-
ized control, where the MGCC decides about the set points for each controller, were evaluated. According to
them, the main difference between the two approaches lies in the amount of information that is processed in
each case. Also, it is said that a decentralized approach only needs a simple local network and the informa-
tion exchange is limited to the essential data only, while a more centralized approach requires a significant
data flow toward a single central point. Finally, it is argued that adopting a decentralized approach allows
every DER manufacturer or loads to embed an agent in the corresponding controller, which would provide
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
“plug-and-play” capabilities, contrary to a centralized system where the installation of any new component
would require changes in the software for the central controller.
Nevertheless, some disadvantages can also be credited to MAS:
• The connection to the wholesale electricity market might be difficult, which may not promote the par-
ticipation of DER in ancillary services and DER programs. It is more suitable to solve local problems,
instead of contributing to global system services at the TSO level.
• In order to solve technical problems in MV and HV distribution grids, the communication requirements
are not very low and the peer-to-peer data flow might be higher than a centralized data flow.
• A high investment is needed on all levels of the distribution system and the capital cost of network com-
ponents is likely to increase.
Although some of the issues raised may be arguable, MAS remains a promising alternative to a more
centralized approach.
Another emergent paradigm for decentralized control, but compatible with the MAS framework, is IoT, or
more specifically, the Internet of energy (IoE) (Vermesan et al., 2011). In this concept, the devices in different
layers of the distribution network (e.g., DER, OLTC, residential loads, RES) are equipped with embedded
intelligence computational and control algorithms, as well as Internet-based communication capability. The
service-oriented architecture (SOA) is the core technology to provide interoperability for the integration of
heterogeneous devices (Vrba et al., 2014).
The FREEDM (future renewable electric energy delivery and management) architecture presented by
Huang et al. (2011) assumes that residential consumers can optimize electrical energy needs with local gen-
eration/demand resources, potentially combined with small-scale storage. The architecture can be applied
to a single distribution feeder or to a distribution grid. Three key technologies compose the FREEDM
model: (i) a plug-and-play interface that includes a 400 V DC bus and a conventional 120 V AC bus, as
well as an open-standard-based communication interface that enables any device (e.g., load, generation
unit) connected to the grid to be instantly recognized; (ii) an energy router (or an Intelligent Energy Man-
agement – IEM – device) that is connected to the 12 kV AC distribution bus and that manages (monitoring
and control) all devices connected to the LV AC and DC buses; (iii) a distributed grid intelligent operating
system distributed across all IEM devices and uses the communication network to coordinate with other
devices.
The IoE has the same advantages of the MAS framework. Furthermore, it can contribute to integrate ser-
vices at different levels of the distribution grid (e.g., residential DR, local constraints management) and
increase the scalability of grid management tools (e.g., possibility of performing distributed/parallel mul-
titemporal optimization). However, issues such as cyber security and data privacy of the data flow and
set points, as well as the reliability of the communication infrastructure, are important barriers for a full
deployment.
2.2 Commercial Solutions

The market has responded to this new management paradigm by presenting different solutions, typically
based on existing SCADA/DMS, that evolved from classical systems to more advanced solutions, namely, by
including information from AMI (advanced metering infrastructure) and considering distributed processing,
typically at substation level.
An analysis of some representative market solutions is provided in this section. The analysis focuses on
the SCADA/DMS for distribution networks, considering systems that include at least the main functions
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
related to monitoring, management, and control of a network. Several other solutions have been developed
and implemented in pilots all over the world, but the focus of this section is to present an overview of the most
advanced systems that are available in the market for the management of distribution grids with significant
DER integration.
Alstom Grid – e-terra distribution. integrated distribution management system (IDMS), a fully integrated
system for the monitoring, management, and control of smart distribution systems, which integrates a suite
of SCADA, DMS, and outage management system (OMS) applications. The platform integrates a set of
real-time state-of-the-art network analysis and optimization functions. Self-healing networks application
FLISR (fault location, detection, isolation, and service restoration) is one of the features and the other is
the Volt-Var optimization functionality. In order to integrate a new function dedicated to DR and DER
resources management, Alstom developed a distributed energy resource management system (DERMS)
to be integrated in this platform, under the European project Grid4EU. Interfaces to external systems are
based on a SOA-based architecture for vendor-neutral data interchange.
Siemens. Spectrum Power DMS: the system integrates the SCADA system, OMS, and advanced fault and
network analysis applications. It also integrates the demand response management system (DRMS) with
functionalities for demand management into transmission and distribution systems. The architecture
of Siemens automated metering and information system (AMIS) is composed of four main layers. For
decentralized systems integrating DG and DR schemes, Siemens developed the decentralized energy
management system (DEMS), based on the VPP concept. Integration with external systems – such
as Geographical Information System (GIS), Advanced Metering, Workforce Management and Asset
Management systems – is done via the CIM (Common Information Model)-based SOA integration
framework.
eMeter Corporation. EnergyIP: which is a cloud-based advanced meter data management system (MDM),
including a data synchronization engine, Metered Usage Data Repository (MUDR), SOA and automated,
event-driven operations. It also provides some network analysis applications, namely, fraud detections,
detection and isolation of faults, meter failures and load monitoring, and Energy Engage applications.
The company was acquired by Siemens in January 2012.
Survalent Technology. ADMS: this system includes a SCADA (SmartSCADA), an outage management
(SmartOMS), and a distribution management (SmartDMS) operating under one graphical user interface
SmartVU. The SmartDMS system includes topology processing, load flow, security analysis, Volt/Var
control, optimal feeder reconfiguration, and fault detection isolation restoration.
ABB. Network Manager DMS: provides monitoring and control, network analysis, network optimization,
and outage management capabilities in an integrated software platform. MicroSCADA Pro DMS is a
compact SCADA/DMS to be installed at the substation level and can interact with upper control layers.
Based on SOA, Network Manager DMS provides interoperability and increased functionality across smart
grid solutions.
Schneider Electric (Formerly Telvent). ADMS: provides a network management solution, including moni-
toring, analysis, control, optimization, planning, and training tools, by combining DMS, GIS, OMS, and
SCADA into a unified solution. All the applications share an unified network database in order to provide
real-time operations data accurately and reliably to network control systems, grid analytics, customer ser-
vice, and business processes. For AMI and MDM, Schneider offers the Electric Titanium solution, and
the Conductor MDM which is an information aggregator from AMI, RTUs (remote terminal units), and
IEDs (intelligent electronic devices) into a common storage management platform.
GE. PowerOn Advantage ADMS: was designed with modularity and includes DMS, OMS, and SCADA,
interfacing with smart grid applications such as smart metering infrastructures. This system also includes
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
applications to deal with LV networks, namely, an LV topology processor, LV unbalanced power flow and
state estimation (SE), DER management, and outage prediction and location.
EFACEC. LV SCADA: integrates the SCADA system and network analysis applications specially designed
to deal with LV networks (Silva et al., 2015). The networks analysis includes topology processor, state
estimator, three-phase unbalanced power flow, fraud management and detection, smart alarm manage-
ment, and fault management and DER management. These functionalities are designed to operate on
different types of topologies, and even in situations of serious lack of information on the network (Silva
et al., 2015).
There are other distribution automation systems, specialized on some tasks and can be integrated on DMS
systems. Some of those systems are presented in the following paragraphs.
Kalkitech – provides solutions for optimizing power generation, automating key transmission and distri-
bution, utility operations, and integration of renewable energy. These include distribution automation
solution, substation automation, wide-area monitoring system, smart metering, economic generation and
dispatch.
ZIV – supplies equipment, systems, and solutions for smart grids, including AMI systems, MV supervision
and automation, LV supervision and quality of supply monitoring, DG integration solutions, solutions for
microgrids, and EV charging stations.
Tatung – provides the Smart Building Management System, the smart grid solutions include smart meters
and AMI system. Using IoT concept, the smart solutions business unit integrates energy-saving products,
ICT technologies, and big data analysis and energy management systems. It also developed the advanced
distribution automation system (ADAS) and the microgrid system integration.
3 Practical Implementation
The smart grid concept is being extensively studied worldwide, with substantial investments being made
in a wide variety of projects. Table 1 shows the investments made until 2011 in some of the most relevant
world economies.
In the past years, the investment in smart grid projects kept increasing but a significant portion of the
investments was used in deployment of smart grid technologies, predominantly in the installation of smart
meters and associated communication and management platforms. As an example, in Europe, from the €3.2
billion invested until 2014, about 26% was applied in R&D activities, while the remaining 74% was used in
demonstration and deployment projects (Covrig et al., 2014).
In the various smart grid projects worldwide, there are several approaches being adopted regarding the
system control and management architecture.
3.1 Europe
In Europe, a trend toward hierarchical and decentralized architectures is clearly noticeable in the projects
developed or under development.
In the Cell Controller project, for example, in Denmark, an ICT infrastructure together with an agent-based
control and management scheme was developed to coordinate a high number of DER, particularly CHP and
wind turbines. In the proposed architecture, a decentralized approach is followed, where a cell represents
the distribution network downstream a transmission substation. A cell controller agent is assumed to be
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
Table 1 Investments in smart grid development
Country/Region Funding for Smart Grid Development
European Union €3.2 billion until 2014 (€56 billion by 2020)

USA €4.9 billion until 2009 (€238–€334 billion by 2030)
China €5.1 billion until 2009
South Korea €580 million until 2009 (€16.8 billion by 2030)
Australia €253 million until 2009
Brazil €144 million until 2009
Japan €598 million until 2009
Source: Adapted from Giordano et al., 2011.
located in the transmission substation, which has the capability of exchanging information with the other
downstream agents located in the distribution substations. The architecture proved to be effective, as impor-
tant grid support services were demonstrated through the coordination of individual units, such as islanding
operation, black-start, voltage control, and reactive power control (Giordano, Gangale, and Fulli, 2011).
By building on the physical architecture of the Cell Controller project, the EcoGrid EU project, also in
Denmark, went a step further and included market mechanisms for aggregation not only on the supply
but also on the demand side. The objective of the EcoGrid EU project, which also follows a decentralized
architecture, was to illustrate that modern ICT and innovative market solutions can enable the operation
of a power system with more than 50% renewable energy sources such as wind, biomass, and PV. To this
end, a real-time market (5-min update of price signals) was developed to exploit flexibility in electricity
consumption (Grande, 2013).
In Portugal, as mentioned in Section 2.1.2, one of the major achievements of the InovGrid project was the
deployment of a smart grid infrastructure in the city of Évora, designated as InovCity, where a hierarchical
control and management architecture was implemented. The infrastructure spans over the entire munici-
pality, reaching around 32,000 LV and 140 MV customers. One of the main objectives in InovCity was to
promote the engagement of customers in energy efficiency programs, through the change of energy usage
behaviors. This goal was achieved and it was found that the smart metering infrastructure and in-house
displays played a relevant role, as a 6.6% reduction in energy consumption was observed in customers
with access to these technologies. From an operational point of view, the hierarchical architecture used in
InovCity proved to be very efficient as it allowed reducing outage time in 5–10% (Gouveia et al., 2015).
3.2 United States

Several of the smart grid projects in the United States are dedicated to the practical implementation of
new technologies and services, namely, smart meters and DR programs. The eEnergy Vermont project, for
example, contemplated the installation of over 304,000 smart meters covering nearly 85% of all Vermont
customers. The project uses technology to convert the electric infrastructure from a one-way delivery system
(conveying electricity to consumers) to a two-way communication system able to relay information about
usage, voltage, existing or potential outages, and equipment performance, between the customer and the
utilities. The architecture proposed in the project, similar to many other projects in the United States, follows
an approach where all the information about grid assets and smart meters is collected and centralized in a
single control center, which will use it to improve the network reliability.
The project also includes two consumer behavior studies, which are assessing time-based rate programs,
including time-of-use and peak-time rebate programs. Customers involved in the consumer behavior studies
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
are provided with web portals and in-home displays. With these new tools, customers are able to make
informed decisions and leverage the new technologies to shift consumption from more expensive peak load
periods (Koliba et al., 2013).
3.3 China
One of the most relevant smart grid demonstration projects in China is located in the World Expo Park, in
Shanghai. In the architecture adopted, all the information about the resources available and buildings’ smart
meters is collected and centralized in a single control center that is linked to a smart distribution substation
in charge of managing the electricity network of the entire park. The energy resources available in the park
include a ground source heat pump, heat collection and ice storage facilities, PV panels, other energy storage
systems and about 1000 new energy vehicles, including 120 electric passenger cars, 36 super-capacitor buses
and 6 fuel cell vehicles running for public transportation, 140 electric pavilion vehicles, and 100 fuel cell
sightseeing cars. The smart distribution substation has several functionalities, such as the smart charging of
EV and V2G (Xu, Xue, and Wong, 2014).
3.4 South Korea

In 2009, the South Korean government decided to set up a large smart grid test-bed in Jeju. In the first
phase (2009–2011), the project focused on the construction of the demonstration infrastructure, including
the communication platform. Afterwards, efforts were turned to the integrated operation and interoperability
of the various DER. The project included several “smart” programs with clearly defined objectives, such as
• Smart Place – Install AMI to increase users’ awareness and create an overall energy management system
capable of using smart appliances and local storage devices.
• Smart Transport – Establish an ICT-based smart charging infrastructure for EV with fast charging and
V2G capability.
• Smart Renewable – Promote the large-scale adoption of renewables and storage technologies to achieve
energy independent buildings.
• Smart Power Grid – Increase network flexibility and implement a self-automated recovery system.
• Smart Electricity – Provide dynamic pricing rates and create a power exchange system.
A centralized approach was followed in the project, where all the information collected from the network
resources is conveyed to an operating center, which is responsible for several demand adjustment programs
for peak load reduction.
3.5 Australia
Several utilities have launched projects for smart grid technology trials in Australia. The project Energy
Australia, for instance, completed a trial of a smart metering infrastructure. In addition to smart metering,
demonstration activities included tests of the impact of consumer DR on peak and overall consumption,
but the data so far has not been sufficient in terms of statistical significance or relevance to broader rollout.
The project also analyzed the impact of in-home displays to foster users’ awareness, with 1300 customers
involved in critical peak pricing and time-of-use pricing programs. The electricity prices are centrally defined
by the utility and then broadcast to all the smart meters, with the customers having the option of adjusting
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
their consumption as a response to the prices. Demand reduction in response to critical peak pricing was
30–40%, average consumption reduction was 3%, and in-home displays had small incremental impact to
critical peak pricing (41% with and 37% without) (Energy Australia, 2010).
3.6 Brazil
The first smart city in Latin America was launched in Búzios, with the opening of the control and monitoring
center of the “Cidade Inteligente Búzios” project, which will allow an automatic and smart regulation in
real time of the town’s electricity distribution network flows. The project follows a centralized architecture,
where the control and monitoring center concentrates all the information collected from the grid assets
and from the buildings’ smart meters. Its main goal is to optimize network operation taking advantage
of consumption flexibility, which will be fostered by home automation, smart appliances, and in-house
displays. The project also includes the installation of LED (light emitting diode) public lightning and DG,
such as PV panels and wind turbines. An infrastructure for electric mobility has also been deployed, with
smart charging stations for cars and bicycles (Klimkowski et al., 2014).
3.7 Japan
One of the most relevant smart grid projects in Japan is known as METI Smart Grid Trial. This 5-year project
started in 2010 and involved an overall investment of $1.1 billion. The project takes place in four cities and is
focused on grid-scale energy storage, EV with V2G, smart homes, and the integration of renewables while
maintaining grid reliability. The four cities involved in the project are (SAIC/EIA (Energy Information
Administration), 2011):
• Kyoto: PV systems and fuel cells were installed in 1000 houses, and EV car sharing programs were
implemented to test load management methodologies.
• Yokohama: 4000 homes were equipped with smart meters using building energy management systems to
automatically adjust the amount of electricity supplied to each home, while monitoring electricity usage
throughout the project. Besides, 27 MW of PV panels were installed and 2000 EV were deployed.
• Toyota: The project introduced 3100 EV in the city to test V2G and G2V connectivity. DR programs were
also tested in 70 houses.
• Kitakyushu: Building energy management systems were deployed in 70 commercial and 200 residential
buildings.
4 A Hybrid Architecture for Smart Grids

This section proposes a control and management architecture that combines hierarchical and distributed con-
trol functions. It was proposed in the framework of the FP7 EU Project SuSTAINABLE (Smart Distribution
System OperaTion for MAximizing the INtegration of RenewABLE Generation) to enable a coordinated
and efficient control of the whole electrical distribution system, taking advantage of its own resources in
order to overcome technical problems that may arise in operation, especially in scenarios with high integra-
tion of RES. It must be stressed that this novel architecture is based on the hierarchical architecture already
deployed in the InovGrid test site in Évora, Portugal. Furthermore, subsequent European projects, such as
DREAM (Caire et al., 2013) and IDE4L (Repo et al., 2014), followed this architecture.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
4.1 Overall Framework

A general framework for the data flow model of the SuSTAINABLE concept is presented in Figure 4. This
framework comprises two different types of information: commercial (related to billing information) and
technical (related to operational information).
At the top level is the DSO central information system, which includes advanced metering management
(AMM), enterprise resource planning (ERP)/asset management (AM), order management system (OMS),
and GIS. All the billing information from the customers down to the LV level, transmitted by the advance
metering infrastructure (AMI), must be processed in an AMM module located at the central information
system level. Also, because several control algorithms that may be envisaged (such as forecasting func-
tions, load flow analysis, state estimation routines) require the knowledge of the exact position of the DER,
it will be necessary to have GIS at the Central Information System level, which should not be local but
cover all the territories that the DSO is responsible for. Therefore, every SCADA/DMS should be able
to communicate with this system. Moreover, a similar situation occurs for the technical characteristics of
the lines, substations, transformers, or smart meters. These characteristics are usually recorded in a central
Market
Ancillary services
(activated bids) TSO
GENCO ESCO Retailers
Data collection AMM

NAP OMS ERP/AM GIS
system DSO central
information system
Tools
State estimation
HV/MV RES + Load
primary SCADA/DMS
Non-real time information
Forecasting (MV)
substation Voltage control (MV)
TVPP
Real time
Information
MV/LV
secondary
substation
Communication and event

management system
Near real time
Information
Hardware
Smart Voltage control
meter (local droops)
DSO managed scope
Figure 4 Overall SuSTAINABLE framework and data flow model. Source: Reproduced from EU Project SuSTAIN-
ABLE Deliverable: D2.3 © European Union, 2014
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
database (ERP/AM) as well as all the subcomponents (e.g., current/voltage transformers) and their history
(i.e., replacement of a current transformer with a new one with a different transformation ratio). This cen-
tral database also interacts with the OMS of the distribution network assets. A Communication and Event
Management System module, at the SCADA/DMS level, is also considered for functions such as outage
analysis and pattern detection and communication failures with pattern detection.
Finally, the DSO will have to handle market data (e.g., flexibility offers, retailing tariffs) and interact with
other market actors (e.g., generation companies – GENCO, energy service companies – ESCO, retailers,
TSO, aggregators, etc.). Ancillary services offered by market agents must also be taken into account because
it is not realistic that they will communicate directly with each SCADA/DMS.
4.2 Control and Management Architecture

The proposed control and management architecture, illustrated in Figure 5, is organized in four main
layers:
• The upper control level with the SCADA/DMS is located at the control center of the distribution system
(i.e., dispatch level). This layer is under the responsibility of the DSO for managing the whole distribution
network and ensures the interface with the upstream transmission grid.
• An intermediate control level located at the HV/MV primary substation – the SSC – which is in charge of
each MV network and incorporates a set of advanced control functionalities that allow a coordinated and
efficient operation of the MV system exploiting the resources that may be available at this level through
set points, namely, storage systems (STOR MV in Figure 5), controllable loads under DSM action (CL
MV in Figure 5), DG units (DG in Figure 5), OLTC transformers (OLTC in Figure 5), and capacitor banks
(CAP MV in Figure 5).
• A lower control level located at the MV/LV secondary substation – the DTC – which is responsible for
a single LV network. This control layer is used to serve as a gateway of data to the upstream systems,
but will also incorporate some basic control functionalities in order to efficiently respond to technical
problems that may occur at the LV network level by communicating set points to the several smart meters
and corresponding DER under its control as well as for MV/LV OLTC transformers and storage devices
(property of the DSO) that may be located at the secondary substation.
• A field control level located at the customer premises in which the smart meter will serve as a gateway
to control its associated resources, namely, microgeneration (μG in Figure 5), controllable loads under
DSM actions (CL LV in Figure 5), storage devices (STOR LV in Figure 5), and EV (in Figure 5).
This architecture is expected to include a home energy manager (HEM) at the LV customer side, which
will be in charge of managing all the resources of domestic clients including controllable loads (appliances),
microgeneration units, and EV and storage devices (if they exist) following a request from the upstream
control structure (i.e., the DSO). In this case, there will be a coordinated management of all resources regard-
less of their nature, requiring only a single smart meter that will serve as a gateway to communicate with
the HEM.
4.3 Advanced Control Functions

The proposed control architecture incorporates several control and monitoring layers previously identified
and enables some form of automated local actions in order to overcome technical problems in network
operation on the several voltage levels.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
SCADA/
DMS
High voltage
SSC
Medium voltage
DG CL (MV) STOR (MV) OLTC CAP (MV)
DTC
Low voltage
STOR
OLTC (DT)
EB EB EB EB
μG CL (LV) EV STOR (LV)
Figure 5 SuSTAINABLE architecture and control layers. Source: Reproduced from EU Project SuSTAINABLE
Deliverable: D2.3 © European Union, 2014
The monitoring capability of the smart grid can be increased with advanced SE functions placed at different
layers of the architecture. SE can include information coming from different sources, namely DTC, EB, and
phasor measurement units (PMU). The information coming from downstream layers of the architecture
can be used to estimate information missing in upstream layers. For example, LV smart meters can make
time-synchronized measurements of active and reactive power, as well as voltage magnitudes, at predefined
time intervals (e.g., every 15 min), which are used to estimate the P/Q load of the upstream MV/LV substation
using computational intelligence techniques (Miranda et al., 2012).
In order to achieve an efficient coordinated control of the distribution system, it is necessary to develop
specific advanced control and management functionalities that explore local resources whenever possible in
order to solve technical problems. The main functionalities identified are the following:
• SE at the MV level;
• Load and RES forecasting at the MV level (see Renewable Energy Forecasting);
• Network planning at the MV level;
• Voltage control at the MV, LV, and field level.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
Depending on whether these functionalities reside physically at the DMS or SSC level, two different
architectures can be envisaged:
• Data processed at the SCADA/DMS level: parallel processing of each SSC data on separate CPU of a
computer cluster or a multi-core processor, which constitutes a hierarchical structure;
• Data processed at the SSC level: decentralized algorithm based on geographically distributed computers
physically located at different SSC, provided an appropriate communication infrastructure is available.
At the first stage, it is assumed that these functionalities may reside physically at the central system’s level
(SCADA/DMS), because they will require data from different MV networks (i.e., different SSC), according
to the hierarchical structure presented previously. Nevertheless, in the medium/long term, it is expected that
the architecture may evolve to a really distributed one provided that other communication solutions (such
as General Packet Radio Service, fiber, etc.) are employed.
The different control layers, their physical levels, as well as the functionalities identified are shown in
Figure 6.
4.4 Example of a Hybrid Voltage Control Function

The objective of the coordinated voltage control functionality developed for the SuSTAINABLE architec-
ture is manifold. The maximization of the integration of energy from variable RES is a first target. Other
significant objectives include optimization of voltage regulation, reduction of energy losses, and minimiza-
tion of RES curtailments. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to develop a methodology to control voltage
throughout the network by coordinating all available regulation devices, DG active and reactive output
power, and storage and controllable loads (Madureira et al., 2015). This strategy will be implemented at
the level of the HV/MV primary substation (SSC), while a secondary controller will also exist at the level
of the MV/LV secondary substations (DTC).
Such a methodology, illustrated in Figure 7, exploits two different levels of control:
• At the MV level – using a multitemporal optimal power flow (OPF) at the functional level of the SSC
to coordinate the several MV control means (DG, storage devices, loads, OLTC, capacitor banks, etc.) in
order to avoid technical problems by satisfying the constraints and minimizing a single or a multi-objective
function. Furthermore, in real-time operation, the multitemporal OPF may be augmented by practical
rule-based control, which will address potential regulation issues (e.g., unforeseen load/DER power vari-
ations, voltage violations).
• At the LV level – centralized controller housed in the DTC, which will send set points to DER located
within the specific LV network (i.e., controllable loads, microgeneration, storage devices) in order to
observe the requirements imposed by the SSC or by responding independently to a set of voltage alarms
obtained from the smart meter; using local droop functionalities (i.e., distributed control) implemented
in some inverters interfacing the DER and a centralized voltage control algorithm housed in the DTC to
remotely update the parameters of the droops based on a set of rules.
5 Concluding Remarks and Open Issues

After evaluating all the concepts and systems that have been supporting a more effective operation of net-
works with a large number of active agents (DG and active consumers), it becomes clear that the system
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
Central management level

Tools
State estimation
RES + load SCADA/
DMS
Functionalities for the MV network
Forecasting (MV)
Voltage control (MV
multi-temporal OPF)
TVPP
High voltage
Medium voltage level
Tools
...
SSC
HV/MV
substation
Medium voltage
Low voltage level
Tools
Voltage control (LV) DTC
MV/LV
substation
Low voltage
Local / Field level
Hardware
Voltage control EB
(local droops)
Figure 6 Functionalities and control layers. Source: Reproduced from EU Project SuSTAINABLE Deliverable: D2.3
© European Union, 2014
is evolving from a centralized to a decentralized management, moving finally toward a more ambitious
trend – a distributed management where local agent system architectures will manage and operate the elec-
trical power grid of the future.
However, it is important to stress that there is not one single solution that can be presented as the more
efficient or appropriated as it depends on the actual conditions and characteristics of the different power
systems. Typically, as ICT capacity and processing capacity increases, the tendency has been to test fully
decentralized architectures. However, one must not forget that with the extension of network observability
until LV networks, the increase in size and complexity of the system is a very important and limitative issue.
Therefore, the best solution should always be the result of a very detailed cost–benefit analysis, as more
important than receiving information in real time from all the nodes, it is the way we manage and support
operators in a simple and effective way that will really support a smarter grid operation.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
DG 1
…
MV/LV MV
DG n
DTC 1 Load 1 …
DTC n
MV
Load n
(central management level)
DTC 2
SCADA/DMS
…
Multi-temporal
optimal power
flow
(local level)
Centralized LV
DTC
Load/RES
voltage control forecasting system
EB 1
Droop
LV … EB n
EB 2 Droop
Figure 7 Voltage control function. Source: Reproduced from EU Project SuSTAINABLE Deliverable: D2.3
© European Union, 2014
This new vision creates many research challenges that are multidisciplinary in nature. The robust, optimal,
secure, operation of such a complex and distributed system requires novel sensing, control, computational
intelligence, and software and communication capacity. Pure analytical approaches from control theory have
to be extended, together with computational intelligence techniques, to address optimality in distributed,
nonstationary and nonobservable environments. The distributed real-time constraints over geographically
wide areas require new secure communication protocols and systems. Another area where critical devel-
opments are envisaged is related to the large amounts of information that will be available in the electric
systems. In fact, the multiple software layers of modern computer-based systems need to be trustworthy,
robust, flexible, user friendly, and perfectly integrated with the enormous databases that will be created. The
collected data needs to be processed in real time to extract information using tools from data mining and
signal processing. In summary, these issues are at the forefront of the research agenda in all these disciplines
and were integrated to conceptualize the foundations of what is really defined as the smart grid.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
References
Baran, M. and El-Markabi, I. (2007) A multiagent-based dispatching scheme for distributed generators for voltage support on distri-
bution feeders. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 22 (1), 52–59.
Caire, R., Lisanti, B., Vanet, E., et al. (2013) DREAM Reference Object Model and Dictionary. Deliverable D5.1 DREAM EU Project.
Chrysochos, A., Kryonidis, G., Kontis, E., et al. (2014) Dynamic Equivalent Models for the Simulation of Controlled DRES. Deliver-
able D3.3 INCREASE EU Project.
Covrig, C.F., Ardelean, M., Vasiljevska, J., et al. (2014) Smart Grid Projects Outlook 2014. Report from the JRC IE (Joint Research
Centre – Institute for Energy and Transport).
Dimeas A. and Hatziargyriou, N. (2004) A Multiagent System for Microgrids. Proceedings of the IEEE Power Engineering Society
General Meeting, Denver, CO, USA, 6–10 June 2004, pp. 55–58.
Dimeas, A. and Hatziargyriou, N. (2005) Operation of a multiagent system for microgrid control. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
20 (3), 1447–1455.
EnergyAustralia (2010) EnergyAustralia’s FY11 Network Pricing Proposal. Report from EnergyAustralia: Electricity & Gas
Provider – Energy Supplier.
Giordano, V., Gangale, F., and Fulli, G. (2011) Smart Grid Projects in Europe: Lessons Learned and Current Developments. Report
from the JRC IE (Joint Research Centre – Institute for Energy).
Giordano, V., Onyeji, I., Fulli, G., et al. (2012) Guidelines for Conducting a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Smart Grid Projects. JRC Report.
doi: 10.2790/32946.
Godinho Matos, P., Daniel, P.R., Veiga, A.M., et al. (2013) InovGrid, a Smart Vision for a Next Generation Distribution System.
Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution (CIRED 2013), Stockholm, Sweden.
Gouveia, C., Rua, D., Soares, F.J., et al. (2015) Development and implementation of Portuguese smart distribution system. Electric
Power Systems Research, 120, 150–162.
Grande, O.S. (2013) EcoGrid EU: From Design to Implementation. Report from the EcoGrid EU Project.
Hatziargyriou, N., Tsikalakis, A., Vlachogiannis, J., et al. (2004) MicroGrid Central Controller Strategies and Algorithms. Deliverable
DC1 MICROGRIDS EU Project.
Hernández, L., Baladrón, C., Lloret, J., et al. (2013) A multi-agent system architecture for smart grid management and forecasting of
energy demand in virtual power plants. IEEE Communications Magazine, 51 (1), 106–113.
Huang, A., Crow, M., Heydt, G., et al. (2011) The future renewable electric energy delivery and management (FREEDM) system: the
energy internet. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99 (1), 133–148.
Jenkins, N., Ekanayake, J.B., and Strbac, G. (2010) Distributed Generation, Institution of Engineering and Technology, London, UK.
Klimkowski, M., Araújo, D.F., Bianchin, C.G., et al. (2014) Metodologia Alternativa para Automação de Redes de Distribuição num
contexto de Smart Grids (in Portuguese). XXI Seminário Nacional de Distribuição de Energia Elétrica, Santos, Brazil.
Koliba, C., Brune, N., Berman, M., et al. (2013) The Energy Vermont Collaborative: Bringing the Smart Grid to the State of Vermont.
Report from the University of Vermont James M. Jeffords Center and Sandia National Laboratories.
Lasseter, R.H. (2002) MicroGrids. IEEE Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, New York, USA, pp. 305–308.
Lasseter, R.H., Akhil, A., Marnay, C., et al. (2002) The CERTS MicroGrid Concept. White Paper on Integration of Distributed Energy
Resources from the Consortium for Electric Reliability Technology Solutions.
Löf, A.M. (2012) Testing of low voltage network automation. Master of Science thesis. Tampere University of Technology, June 2012.
Madureira, A., Bessa, R., Meirinhos, J., et al. (2015) The Impact of Solar Power Forecast Errors on Voltage Control in Smart Distri-
bution Grids. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution (CIRED 2015), Lyon,
France.
Madureira, A.G., Pereira, J.C., Gil, N.J., et al. (2011) Advanced control and management functionalities for multi-microgrids. European
Transactions on Electrical Power, 21 (2), 1159–1177.
Masters, C.L. (2002) Voltage rise – the big issue when connecting embedded generation to long 11 kV overhead lines. Power Engi-
neering Journal, 16, 5–12.
McArthur, S., Davidson, E., Catterson, V., et al. (2007a) Multi-agent systems for power engineering applications – part I: concepts,
approaches, and technical challenges. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 22 (4), 1743–1752.
McArthur, S., Davidson, E., Catterson, V., et al. (2007b) Multi-agent systems for power engineering applications – part II: technolo-
gies, standards, and tools for building multi-agent systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 22 (4), 1753–1759.
Miranda, V., Krstulovic, J., Keko, H., et al. (2012) Reconstructing missing data in state estimation with autoencoders. IEEE Transac-
tions on Power Systems, 27 (2), 604–611.
Djapic, P., Ramsay, C., Pudjianto, D., et al. (2007) Taking an active approach. IEEE Power & Energy Magazine, 5, 68–77.
Peças Lopes, J.A., Hatziargyriou, N., Mutale, J., et al. (2007) Integrating distributed generation into electric power systems: a review
of drivers, challenges and opportunities. Electric Power Systems Research, 77 (9), 1189–1203.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058
Peças Lopes, J.A., Soares, F.J., and Almeida, P.M.R. (2011) Integration of electric vehicles in the electric power system. Proceedings
of the IEEE, 99 (1), 168–183.
Peças Lopes, J.A., Madureira, A., Gil, N., et al. (2013a) Operation of multi-microgrids, in Microgrids: Architectures and Control, (ed.
N. Hatziargyriou), John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester, United Kingdom. pp. 165–205.
Peças Lopes, J.A., Madureira, A.G., and Moreira, C.L. (2013b) A view of microgrids. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and
Environment, 2 (1), 86–103.
Peças Lopes, J.A., Moreira, C.L., and Madureira, A.G. (2006) Defining control strategies for microgrids islanded operation. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 21 (2), 916–924.
Peças Lopes, J.A. and Saraiva, J.T. (2003) Management of Microgrids. Proceedings of the International Electric Equipment Conference,
Bilbao, Spain, pp. 28–29.
Repo, S., Cairo, I., Verheggen, L., et al. (2014) Specification of Active Distribution Network Concept, Deliverable Report 2.1 IDE4L
EU Project.
SAIC/EIA (Energy Information Administration) (2011) Smart Grid Around the World. Report prepared by SAIC for the EIA.
Silva, N., Silva, P., Seca, L., et al. (2015) LV SCADA – How to Effectively Manage LV Networks with Limited Topology and Electrical
Characteristics Data. CIRED 2015 – The 23rd International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution, Lyon, France.
Vermesan, O., Friess, P., Guillemin, P., et al. (2011) Internet of Things Strategic Research Roadmap. Report from the IERC (IoT
European Research Cluster).
Vrba, P., Mařík, V., Siano, P., et al. (2014) A review of agent and service-oriented concepts applied to intelligent energy systems. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 10 (3), 1890–1903.
Wang, W., Xu, Y., and Khanna, M. (2011) A survey on the communication architectures in smart grid. Computer Networks, 55,
3604–3629.
Xu, Z., Xue, Y., and Wong, K.P. (2014) Recent advancements on smart grids in China. Electric Power Components and Systems, 42
(3–4), 251–261.
Zhabelova, G. and Vyatkin, V. (2012) Multiagent smart grid automation architecture based on IEC 61850/61499 intelligent logical
nodes. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 59 (5), 2351–2362.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118755471.sgd058

Smart Grid Handbook Control and Management Architectures PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Smart Grid Handbook Control and Management Architectures PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Control and Management Architectures

Manuel A. Matos1 , Luís Seca2 , André G. Madureira2 , Filipe J. Soares2 , Ricardo J.

1.2 Literature Overview

• Deferral of investments in transmission and distribution systems;

1.3 Aims and Structure of this Chapter

2.1.1 Centralized Architecture

2.1.2 Hierarchical Architectures

RTU RTU CAMC

InovGrid reference technical architecture

Central Services Oriented Architecture (SOA)

Electrical grid Distribution

Figure 3 InovGrid architecture. Source: Reproduced by permission of EDP Distribuição

2.1.3 Decentralized Architectures

2.2 Commercial Solutions

Table 1 Investments in smart grid development

Country/Region Funding for Smart Grid Development

European Union €3.2 billion until 2014 (€56 billion by 2020)

3.2 United States

3.4 South Korea

4 A Hybrid Architecture for Smart Grids

4.1 Overall Framework

Data collection AMM

Communication and event

DSO managed scope

4.2 Control and Management Architecture

4.3 Advanced Control Functions

DG CL (MV) STOR (MV) OLTC CAP (MV)

μG CL (LV) EV STOR (LV)

4.4 Example of a Hybrid Voltage Control Function

5 Concluding Remarks and Open Issues

Central management level

You might also like