Bullo Slides

Synchronization in Power Networks
Florian Dorer and Francesco Bullo

Center for Control,
Dynamical Systems & Computation
University of California at Santa Barbara
http://motion.me.ucsb.edu
Institute for Energy Eciency
UC Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara, California, October 19, 2011
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 1 / 23
Motivation: the current power grid is . . .
. . . the greatest engineering achievement of the 20th century.
[National Academy of Engineering 10]
1
large-scale, complex, & rich nonlinear dynamics
2
100 years old and operating at its capacity limits
Motivation: the current power grid is . . .
. . . the greatest engineering achievement of the 20th century.
[National Academy of Engineering 10]
1
large-scale, complex, & rich nonlinear dynamics
2
100 years old and operating at its capacity limits BLACKOUTS
The Blackout of 2003: 8/15/2003
Failure Reveals Creaky System, Experts Believe
Motivation: the envisioned power grid
Energy is one of the top three national priorities
Expected developments in smart grid:
1
large number of distributed power sources
2
increasing adoption of renewables
3
sophisticated cyber-coordination layer
challenges: increasingly complex networks & stochastic disturbances
opportunity: some smart grid keywords:
control/sensing/optimization distributed/coordinated/decentralized
Central theme: understanding and taming complexity
Motivation: the envisioned power grid
Energy is one of the top three national priorities
Expected developments in smart grid:
1
large number of distributed power sources
2
increasing adoption of renewables
3
sophisticated cyber-coordination layer
challenges: increasingly complex networks & stochastic disturbances
opportunity: some smart grid keywords:
control/sensing/optimization distributed/coordinated/decentralized
Central theme: understanding and taming complexity
Motivation: the envisioned power grid our viewpoint
Projects at UCSB: power systems engineering networked control
1
detection and identication of faults & cyber-physical attacks
(together with F. Pasqualetti)

t
1
t
2
t
3
3
g
1
g
2
g
3
b
4
b
1
b
5
b
2
b
6
b
3
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Sensors
WECC 3/9 power system system dynamics & measurement
Objectives:
Is the attack or fault detectable/identiable by measurements?
How to design (distributed) lters for detection/identication?
1
detection and identication of faults & cyber-physical attacks
(together with F. Pasqualetti)

t
1
t
2
t
3
3
g
1
g
2
g
3
b
4
b
1
b
5
b
2
b
6
b
3
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Sensors
WECC 3/9 power system system dynamics & measurement
Objectives:
Is the attack or fault detectable/identiable by measurements?
How to design (distributed) lters for detection/identication?
2
Synchronization & transient stability
Generators have to swing synchronously
despite severe uctuations in generation/load
or faults in network/system components
Objectives [D. Hill & G. Chen 06]: power network dynamics
?
graph
Observations from distinct elds:
power networks are coupled oscillators
coupled oscillators sync for large coupling
graph theory quanties coupling, e.g.,
2
plausible(?): power networks sync for large
2
x
x
x
2
Synchronization & transient stability
Generators have to swing synchronously
despite severe uctuations in generation/load
or faults in network/system components
Objectives [D. Hill & G. Chen 06]: power network dynamics
?
graph
Observations from distinct elds:
power networks are coupled oscillators
coupled oscillators sync for large coupling
graph theory quanties coupling, e.g.,
2
plausible(?): power networks sync for large
2
x
x
x
3
Kron reduction model reduction using algebraic graph theory
2
10
30
25
8
37
29
9
38
23
7
3
6
22
6
3
5
19
4
33
20
5
34
10
3
32
6
2
3
1
1
8
7
5
4
3
18
17
26
27
28
24
21
16
15 14
13
12
11
1
3
9
9
2
30 25
37
29
38
23
3
6
22
3
5
19
33
20
34
10
32
6 3
1
1
8
7
5
4
3
18
17
26
27
28
24
21
16
15 14
13
12
11
3
9
9
10
9
7
6
4
5
3
2
1
8
15
5
12
11
10
7
8
9
4
3
1
2
17
18
14
16
19
20
21
24
26
27
28
31
32
34 33
36
38
39
22
35
6
13
30
37
25
29
23
1
10
8
2
3
6
9
4
7
5
F
Fig. 9. The New England test system [10], [11]. The system includes
10 synchronous generators and 39 buses. Most of the buses have constant
active and reactive power loads. Coupled swing dynamics of 10 generators
are studied in the case that a line-to-ground fault occurs at point F near bus
16.
test system can be represented by
i
=
i
,
H
i
f
s

i
= D
i
i
+ P
mi
G
ii
E
2
i

10
j=1,j=i
E
i
E
j
{G
ij
cos(
i
j
) + B
ij
sin(
i
j
)},
(11)
where i = 2, . . . , 10.
i
is the rotor angle of generator i with
respect to bus 1, and
i
the rotor speed deviation of generator
i relative to system angular frequency (2f
s
= 2 60 Hz).
1
is constant for the above assumption. The parameters
f
s
, H
i
, P
mi
, D
i
, E
i
, G
ii
, G
ij
, and B
ij
are in per unit
system except for H
i
and D
i
in second, and for f
s
in Helz.
The mechanical input power P
mi
to generator i and the
magnitude E
i
of internal voltage in generator i are assumed
to be constant for transient stability studies [1], [2]. H
i
is
the inertia constant of generator i, D
i
its damping coefcient,
and they are constant. G
ii
is the internal conductance, and
G
ij
+ jB
ij
the transfer impedance between generators i
and j; They are the parameters which change with network
topology changes. Note that electrical loads in the test system
are modeled as passive impedance [11].
B. Numerical Experiment
Coupled swing dynamics of 10 generators in the
test system are simulated. E
i
and the initial condition
(
i
(0),
i
(0) = 0) for generator i are xed through power
ow calculation. H
i
is xed at the original values in [11].
P
mi
and constant power loads are assumed to be 50% at their
ratings [22]. The damping D
i
is 0.005 s for all generators.
G
ii
, G
ij
, and B
ij
are also based on the original line data
in [11] and the power ow calculation. It is assumed that
the test system is in a steady operating condition at t = 0 s,
that a line-to-ground fault occurs at point F near bus 16 at
t = 1 s20/(60 Hz), and that line 1617 trips at t = 1 s. The
fault duration is 20 cycles of a 60-Hz sine wave. The fault
is simulated by adding a small impedance (10
7
j) between
bus 16 and ground. Fig. 10 shows coupled swings of rotor
angle
i
in the test system. The gure indicates that all rotor
angles start to grow coherently at about 8 s. The coherent
growing is global instability.
C. Remarks
It was conrmed that the system (11) in the New Eng-
land test system shows global instability. A few comments
0 2 4 6 8 10
-5
0
5
10
15
i

/

r
a
d

10
02
03
04
05
0 2 4 6 8 10
-5
0
5
10
15
i

/

r
a
d
TIME / s

06
07
08
09
Fig. 10. Coupled swing of phase angle i in New England test system.
The fault duration is 20 cycles of a 60-Hz sine wave. The result is obtained
by numerical integration of eqs. (11).
are provided to discuss whether the instability in Fig. 10
occurs in the corresponding real power system. First, the
classical model with constant voltage behind impedance is
used for rst swing criterion of transient stability [1]. This is
because second and multi swings may be affected by voltage
uctuations, damping effects, controllers such as AVR, PSS,
and governor. Second, the fault durations, which we xed at
20 cycles, are normally less than 10 cycles. Last, the load
condition used above is different from the original one in
[11]. We cannot hence argue that global instability occurs in
the real system. Analysis, however, does show a possibility
of global instability in real power systems.
IV. TOWARDS A CONTROL FOR GLOBAL SWING
INSTABILITY
Global instability is related to the undesirable phenomenon
that should be avoided by control. We introduce a key
mechanism for the control problem and discuss control
strategies for preventing or avoiding the instability.
A. Internal Resonance as Another Mechanism
Inspired by [12], we here describe the global instability
with dynamical systems theory close to internal resonance
[23], [24]. Consider collective dynamics in the system (5).
For the system (5) with small parameters p
m
and b, the set
{(, ) S
1
R | = 0} of states in the phase plane is
called resonant surface [23], and its neighborhood resonant
band. The phase plane is decomposed into the two parts:
resonant band and high-energy zone outside of it. Here the
initial conditions of local and mode disturbances in Sec. II
indeed exist inside the resonant band. The collective motion
before the onset of coherent growing is trapped near the
resonant band. On the other hand, after the coherent growing,
it escapes from the resonant band as shown in Figs. 3(b),
4(b), 5, and 8(b) and (c). The trapped motion is almost
integrable and is regarded as a captured state in resonance
[23]. At a moment, the integrable motion may be interrupted
by small kicks that happen during the resonant band. That is,
the so-called release from resonance [23] happens, and the
collective motion crosses the homoclinic orbit in Figs. 3(b),
4(b), 5, and 8(b) and (c), and hence it goes away from
the resonant band. It is therefore said that global instability
47th EEE CDC, Cancun, Mexico, Dec. 9-11, 2008 WeA18.4
2491
Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ of Calif Santa Barbara. Downloaded on June 10, 2009 at 14:48 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
New England power grid graph equivalent reduced grid
Objectives: How are the two electrically-equivalent networks related in
terms of graph topology, spectrum, resistance, . . . ?
Applications of Kron reduction in smart grid problems?
Summary of activities of last 2 years
Research Areas: power systems engineering networked control
1
synchronization and transient stability
2
detection and identication of faults and cyber-physical attacks
3
model reduction and scalability
Academics
Education: PhD students Florian Dorer and Fabio Pasqualetti
Publications: 3 journal articles (SIAM & IFAC), 9 conference articles
Awards: two plenaries, two best paper awards
2011-14 NSF project Cyber-Physical Challenges of Transient
Stability and Security in Power Grids.
NSF CyperPhysical Systems and Trustworthy Computing Programs
Collaboration with Ian Dobson (Wisconsin) and Bruno Sinopoli (CMU)
Collaboration with Los Alamos National Lab, DOE project
Optimization and Control Theory for Smart Grids, Misha Chertkov
Summary of activities of last 2 years
Research Areas: power systems engineering networked control
1
synchronization and transient stability
2
detection and identication of faults and cyber-physical attacks
3
model reduction and scalability
Academics
Education: PhD students Florian Dorer and Fabio Pasqualetti
Publications: 3 journal articles (SIAM & IFAC), 9 conference articles
Awards: two plenaries, two best paper awards
2011-14 NSF project Cyber-Physical Challenges of Transient
Stability and Security in Power Grids.
NSF CyperPhysical Systems and Trustworthy Computing Programs
Collaboration with Ian Dobson (Wisconsin) and Bruno Sinopoli (CMU)
Collaboration with Los Alamos National Lab, DOE project
Optimization and Control Theory for Smart Grids, Misha Chertkov
Outline
1
Introduction and Motivation
2
Mathematical Modeling & Synchronization Problem
3
Synchronization in the Kuramoto Model
4
From the Kuramoto Model to the Power Network Model
5
Conclusions
Structure-preserving power network model
New England Power Grid
15
5
12
11
10
7
8
9
4
3
1
2
17
18
14
16
19
20
21
24
26
27
28
31
32
34 33
36
38
39
22
35
6
13
30
37
25
29
23
1
10
8
2
3
6
9
4
7
5
F
Fig. 9. The New England test system [10], [11]. The system includes
10 synchronous generators and 39 buses. Most of the buses have constant
active and reactive power loads. Coupled swing dynamics of 10 generators
are studied in the case that a line-to-ground fault occurs at point F near bus
16.
test system can be represented by
i
=
i
,
H
i
f
s

i
= D
i
i
+ P
mi
G
ii
E
2
i

10
j=1,j=i
E
i
E
j
{G
ij
cos(
i
j
) + B
ij
sin(
i
j
)},
(11)
where i = 2, . . . , 10.
i
is the rotor angle of generator i with
respect to bus 1, and
i
the rotor speed deviation of generator
i relative to system angular frequency (2f
s
= 2 60 Hz).
1
is constant for the above assumption. The parameters
f
s
, H
i
, P
mi
, D
i
, E
i
, G
ii
, G
ij
, and B
ij
are in per unit
system except for H
i
and D
i
in second, and for f
s
in Helz.
The mechanical input power P
mi
to generator i and the
magnitude E
i
of internal voltage in generator i are assumed
to be constant for transient stability studies [1], [2]. H
i
is
the inertia constant of generator i, D
i
its damping coefcient,
and they are constant. G
ii
is the internal conductance, and
G
ij
+ jB
ij
the transfer impedance between generators i
and j; They are the parameters which change with network
topology changes. Note that electrical loads in the test system
are modeled as passive impedance [11].
B. Numerical Experiment
Coupled swing dynamics of 10 generators in the
test system are simulated. E
i
and the initial condition
(
i
(0),
i
(0) = 0) for generator i are xed through power
ow calculation. H
i
is xed at the original values in [11].
P
mi
and constant power loads are assumed to be 50% at their
ratings [22]. The damping D
i
is 0.005 s for all generators.
G
ii
, G
ij
, and B
ij
are also based on the original line data
in [11] and the power ow calculation. It is assumed that
the test system is in a steady operating condition at t = 0 s,
that a line-to-ground fault occurs at point F near bus 16 at
t = 1 s20/(60 Hz), and that line 1617 trips at t = 1 s. The
fault duration is 20 cycles of a 60-Hz sine wave. The fault
is simulated by adding a small impedance (10
7
j) between
bus 16 and ground. Fig. 10 shows coupled swings of rotor
angle
i
in the test system. The gure indicates that all rotor
angles start to grow coherently at about 8 s. The coherent
growing is global instability.
C. Remarks
It was conrmed that the system (11) in the New Eng-
land test system shows global instability. A few comments
0 2 4 6 8 10
-5
0
5
10
15
i

/

r
a
d

10
02
03
04
05
0 2 4 6 8 10
-5
0
5
10
15
i

/

r
a
d
TIME / s

06
07
08
09
Fig. 10. Coupled swing of phase angle
i
in New England test system.
The fault duration is 20 cycles of a 60-Hz sine wave. The result is obtained
by numerical integration of eqs. (11).
are provided to discuss whether the instability in Fig. 10
occurs in the corresponding real power system. First, the
classical model with constant voltage behind impedance is
used for rst swing criterion of transient stability [1]. This is
because second and multi swings may be affected by voltage
uctuations, damping effects, controllers such as AVR, PSS,
and governor. Second, the fault durations, which we xed at
20 cycles, are normally less than 10 cycles. Last, the load
condition used above is different from the original one in
[11]. We cannot hence argue that global instability occurs in
the real system. Analysis, however, does show a possibility
of global instability in real power systems.
IV. TOWARDS A CONTROL FOR GLOBAL SWING
INSTABILITY
Global instability is related to the undesirable phenomenon
that should be avoided by control. We introduce a key
mechanism for the control problem and discuss control
strategies for preventing or avoiding the instability.
A. Internal Resonance as Another Mechanism
Inspired by [12], we here describe the global instability
with dynamical systems theory close to internal resonance
[23], [24]. Consider collective dynamics in the system (5).
For the system (5) with small parameters p
m
and b, the set
{(, ) S
1
R | = 0} of states in the phase plane is
called resonant surface [23], and its neighborhood resonant
band. The phase plane is decomposed into the two parts:
resonant band and high-energy zone outside of it. Here the
initial conditions of local and mode disturbances in Sec. II
indeed exist inside the resonant band. The collective motion
before the onset of coherent growing is trapped near the
resonant band. On the other hand, after the coherent growing,
it escapes from the resonant band as shown in Figs. 3(b),
4(b), 5, and 8(b) and (c). The trapped motion is almost
integrable and is regarded as a captured state in resonance
[23]. At a moment, the integrable motion may be interrupted
by small kicks that happen during the resonant band. That is,
the so-called release from resonance [23] happens, and the
collective motion crosses the homoclinic orbit in Figs. 3(b),
4(b), 5, and 8(b) and (c), and hence it goes away from
the resonant band. It is therefore said that global instability
47th EEE CDC, Cancun, Mexico, Dec. 9-11, 2008 WeA18.4
2491
Authorized licensed use limited to: Univ of Calif Santa Barbara. Downloaded on June 10, 2009 at 14:48 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2
1
0
3
0
25
8
37
29
9
3
8
23
7
3
6
22
6
3
5
19
4
3
3
20
5
34
10
3
3
2
6
2
3
1
1
8
7
5
4
3
18
17
26
27
28
24
21
16
15 14
13
12
11
1
3
9
9
Power network topology:
1
n generators , each connected to a bus
2
m buses form a connected graph
3
admittance matrix Y
network
C
(n+m)(n+m)
characterizes the network
1
n generators :
modeled by dynamic swing equations:
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
mech.in,i
P
electr.out,i
2
10
30
25
8
37
29
9
38
23
7
3
6
22
6
3
5
19
4
33
20
5
34
10
3
32
6
2
3
1
1
8
7
5
4
3
18
17
26
27
28
24
21
16
15 14
13
12
11
1
3
9
9
2
m buses :
load model: constant real power demand
& linear frequency dependence
D
i

i
+ P
load,i
=
n+m
j =1
|V
i
| |V
j
| |Y
ij
| sin
i

j
Y
jk
Y
ik
D
k
k
P
load,k
Classic structure-preserving model [A.R. Bergen & D. Hill 81]:
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n}
D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {n + 1, . . . m}
P
ij
= |V
i
| |V
j
| |Y
ij
| 0 max. power transferred i j
P
i
=
P
mech.in,i
for i {1, . . . , n}
P
load,i
for i {n + 1, . . . m}
real power injection at i
Synchronization and transient stability
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n}
D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {n + 1, . . . m}
1
General synchronization problem: |
i

j
| bounded &

i
=

j
2
Classic analysis methods: Assumptions & Hamiltonian arguments
highly developed eld based on global system perspective
Open Problem [D. Hill & G. Chen 06]:
synchronization in power networks
?
underlying graph properties
Detour: Synchronization of coupled oscillators
It all began with two pendulum clocks and the
observation of an odd kind of sympathy .
[Huygens, C. Horologium Oscillatorium, 1673]
Todays canonical coupled oscillator model
[A. Winfree 67, Y. Kuramoto 75]
Kuramoto model of coupled oscillators:
i
=
i

K
n
n
j =1
sin(
i

j
)
n oscillators with phase
i
S
1
non-identical natural frequencies
i
R
1
elastic coupling with strength K/n
x
x
x

1
2
S
1
K/n
Kuramoto model of coupled oscillators:
i
=
i

K
n
n
j =1
sin(
i

j
)
Just a few of various direct & related applications:
Sync of coupled pendulum clocks [C. Huygens XVII, M. Bennet et. al 02]
Sync in Josephson junctions [S. Watanabe et. al 97, K. Wiesenfeld et al. 98]
Sync in a population of reies [G.B. Ermentrout 90, Y. Zhou et al. 06]
Deep-brain stimulation and neuroscience
[P.A. Tass 03, E. Brown et al. 04]
Coordination of particle models
[R. Sepulchre et al. 07, D. Klein et al. 09]
Countless other technological, biological, & social sync
phenomena [A. Winfree 67, S.H. Strogatz 00, J. Acebr on 01]
A well-understood linear synchronization
model [M. DeGroot 74, J. Tsitsiklis 84,. . . ]
Consensus protocol:
x
i
=
n
j =1
a
ij
(x
i
x
j
)
n identical agents with state variable x
i
R
interaction described by a connected graph with weights a
ij
a few applications: robotic coordination, sensor networks, distributed
computation & optimization, continuous Markov chains, . . .
R
The big picture
Consensus protocols: Kuramoto oscillators:
?
Open problem: sync in power networks
state, parameters, and topology of graph
i
=
i
n
j=1
K
n
sin(
i
j
)
M
i
i
+D
i

i
= P
i
n
j=1
P
ij
sin(
i
j
)
x
i
=
n
j=1
a
ij
(x
i
x
j
)
The big picture
Consensus protocols: Kuramoto oscillators:
?
i
=
i
n
j=1
K
n
sin(
i
j
)
M
i
i
+D
i

i
= P
i
n
j=1
P
ij
sin(
i
j
)
x
i
=
n
j=1
a
ij
(x
i
x
j
)
Previous observations about this connection:
Power systems: [D. Subbarao et al., 01, G. Filatrella et al., 08, V. Fioriti et al., 09]
Networked control: [D. Hill et al., 06, M. Arcak, 07]
Dynamical systems: [H. Tanaka et al., 97, A. Arenas 08]
Outline
1
2
3
4
5
Conclusions
Classic Homogeneous Kuramoto model
i
=
i

K
n
n
j =1
sin(
i

j
)
Notions of synchronization:
1
phase cohesiveness: |
i
(t)
j
(t)| bounded
2
frequency synchronization:

i
(t) =

j
(t)
Classic intuition:
K small & |
i

j
| large
incoherence & no sync
K large & |
i

j
| small
cohesiveness & frequency sync
Classic homogeneous Kuramoto model:

i
=
i

K
n
n
j =1
sin(
i

j
)
Necessary and sucient condition [F. Dorer & F. Bullo 10]
The following two statements are equivalent:
1
Coupling dominates non-uniformity, i.e., K > K
critical

max
min
.
2
The Kuramoto model achieves phase cohesiveness & exponential
frequency synchronization for all
i
[
min
,
max
].
Some consequences:
1) phase cohesiveness depends on ratio K/K
critical
2) frequency synchronization to average
sync
=
n
i =1

i
/n
Topological Kuramoto model
i
=
i

n
j =1
a
ij
sin(
i

j
)
Assume: coupling graph is
undirected and connected
x
x
x
2
a
12
a
13
a
23
S
1
i
=
i

n
j =1
a
ij
sin(
i

j
)
1
Necessary conditions: no sync if
n
j =1
a
ij

n
k=1
k
n
2
Various sucient conditions in the literature [F. Dorer & F. Bullo, 09]:
Based on algebraic connectivity:
2
>
2
, . . .
2
3
Under development are exact conditions for synchronization
implication: coupling dominates non-uniformity sync
i
=
i

n
j =1
a
ij
sin(
i

j
)
1
n
j =1
a
ij

n
k=1
k
n
2
2
>
2
, . . .
2
3
i
=
i

n
j =1
a
ij
sin(
i

j
)
1
n
j =1
a
ij

n
k=1
k
n
2
2
>
2
, . . .
2
3
Outline
1
2
3
4
5
Conclusions
1) Structure-preserving power network model on T
n+m
R
n
:
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n}
D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {n + 1, . . . m}
2) Non-uniform variation of Kuramoto model on T
n+m
:
i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n + m}
1) Structure-preserving power network model on T
n+m
R
n
:
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n}
D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {n + 1, . . . m}
2) Non-uniform variation of Kuramoto model on T
n+m
:
i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n + m}
Synchronization conditions can be related via
1
extension of 1
st
-order analysis [D. Koditschek 88, Y.P. Choi et al. 10]
2
time scale separation analysis [F. D orer & F. Bullo 09]
3
today: local topological equivalence [F. D orer & F. Bullo 11]
near the equilibrium manifolds 1) synchronizes 2) synchronizes
near the equilibrium manifolds 1) & 2) are topologically conjugate
22 F. Dorer and F. Bullo
0.5 1 1.5
0.5
0
0.5
(t)
(
t
)
0.5 1 1.5
0.5
0
0.5
(t)
(
t
)
(t) [rad] (t) [rad]
(
t
)
[
r
a
d
/
s
]
(
t
)
[
r
a
d
/
s
]
Fig. 5.1. Phase space plot of a network of n = 4 second-order Kuramoto oscillators (1.3) with
n = m (left plot) and the corresponding rst-order scaled Kuramoto oscillators (5.8) together with
the scaled frequency dynamics (5.9) (right plot). The natural frequencies
i
, damping terms D
i
,
and coupling strength K are such that
sync
= 0 and K/K
critical
= 1.1. From the same initial
conguration (0) (denoted by ) both rst and second-order oscillators converge exponentially to
the same nearby phase-locked equilibria (denoted by ) as predicted by Theorems 5.1 and 5.3.
(
,0
(t), 0
m1
). Hence, the phase-synchronized orbit (
,0
(t), 0
m1
), understood as
a geometric object in T
n
R
m
, constitutes a one-dimensional equilibrium manifold of
the multi-rate Kuramoto model (5.11). After factoring out the translational invari-
ance of the angular variable , the exponentially-synchronized orbit (
,0
(t), 0
m1
)
corresponds to an isolated equilibrium of (5.11) in the quotient space T
n
\ S
1
R
m
.
Since an isolated equilibrium of a smooth nonlinear system with bounded and Lips-
chitz Jacobian is exponentially stable if and only if the Jacobian is a Hurwitz matrix
[30, Theorem 4.15], the locally exponentially stable orbit (
,0
(t), 0
m1
) must be
hyperbolic in the quotient space T
n
\ S
1
R
m
. Therefore, the equilibrium trajec-
tory (
,0
(t), 0
m1
) is exponentially stable in T
n
R
m
if and only if the Jacobian of
(5.11) evaluated along (
,0
(t), 0
m1
), has n +m1 stable eigenvalues and one zero
eigenvalue corresponding to the translational invariance in S
1
.
By an analogous reasoning we reach the same conclusion for the rst-order multi-
rate Kuramoto model (5.6) (formulated in a rotating frame with frequency
sync
)
and for the scaled Kuramoto model (5.8): the exponentially-synchronized trajectory
,0
(t) T
n
is exponentially stable if and only if the Jacobian of (5.8) evaluated
along
,0
(t) has n 1 stable eigenvalues and one zero eigenvalue. Finally, recall
that the multi-rate Kuramoto model (5.11), its rst-order variant (5.6) together with
frequency dynamics (5.7) (in a rotating frame), and the scaled Kuramoto model (5.8)
together with scaled frequency dynamics (5.9) are all instances of the parameterized
system (5.1). Therefore, by Theorem 5.1, the corresponding Jacobians have the same
inertia and local exponential stability of one system implies local exponential stability
of the other system. This concludes the proof of the equivalences (i) (ii) (iii).
We now prove the nal conjugacy statement. By the generalized Hartman-
Grobman theorem [17, Theorem 6], the trajectories of the three vector elds (5.11),
(5.6)-(5.7) (formulated in a rotating frame), and (5.8)-(5.9) are locally topologically
conjugate to the ow generated by their respective linearized vector elds (locally
near (
,0
(t), 0
m1
). Since the three vector elds (5.11), (5.6)-(5.7), and (5.8)-(5.9)
are hyperbolic with respect to (
,0
(t), 0
m1
) and their respective Jacobians have the
Main Synchronization Results
Structure-preserving power network model:
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n}
D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {n + 1, . . . m}
1
necessary condition: Let
sync
=
k
P
k
/
k
D
k
, then
n+m
j =1
P
ij
|P
i
D
i

sync
| no sync
2
sucient condition: Let

P
i
= P
i
D
i

sync
, then
2
>
P
1

P
2
, . . .
2
sync
3
conjectured exact conditions are under development
bottom line: coupling dominates imbalance in active power
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n}
D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {n + 1, . . . m}
1
sync
=
k
P
k
/
k
D
k
, then
n+m
j =1
P
ij
|P
i
D
i

sync
| no sync
2

P
i
= P
i
D
i

sync
, then
2
>
P
1

P
2
, . . .
2
sync
3
M
i

i
+ D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {1, . . . , n}
D
i

i
= P
i

n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i

j
) , i {n + 1, . . . m}
1
sync
=
k
P
k
/
k
D
k
, then
n+m
j =1
P
ij
|P
i
D
i

sync
| no sync
2

P
i
= P
i
D
i

sync
, then
2
>
P
1

P
2
, . . .
2
sync
3
Illustration with the IEEE Reliability Test System 96 under severe loading
220
309
310
120
103
209
102 102
118
307
302
216
202
t [s]
|
i
(
t
)
j
(
t
)
|
[
r
a
d
]
min
t [s] t [s]
i
(
t
)
[
r
a
d
/
s
]
i
(
t
)
[
r
a
d
]
i
(t)
(t)
i
D
i
sync
Conjectured Kuramoto sync condition is marginally satised
|
i
(
t
)
j
(
t
)
|
[
r
a
d
]
/2
t [s] t [s]
i
(
t
)
[
r
a
d
/
s
]
i
(
t
)
[
r
a
d
]
50 s
7 rad
50 s
3 rad/s
3 rad/s
15 rad
10 rad 50 s
t [s]
Conjectured Kuramoto sync condition is marginally not satised
Outline
1
2
3
4
5
Conclusions
Conclusions
Structure-preserving
power system model
2
30 25
37
29
38
23
36
22
35
19
33
20
34
10
32
6 31
1
8
7
5
4
3
18
17
26
27
28
24
21
16
15 14
13
12
11
39
9
10
9
7
6
4
5
3
2
1
8
Network-reduced
power system model
Kron
reduction
Consensus
protocols
& robotic
coordination
Coupled
Kuramoto
oscillators
rst principle
modeling
mathematical
analysis
graph
theory
X
2
10
30 25
8
37
29
9
38
23
7
36
22
6
35
19
4
33 20
5
34
10
3
32
6
2
31
1
8
7
5
4
3
18
17
26
27
28
24
21
16
15 14
13
12
11
1
39
9
Ambitious workplan: sharpest conditions for most realistic models
from synchronization analysis to control design

Bullo Slides

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Bullo Slides

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Synchronization in Power Networks

Florian Dorer and Francesco Bullo

You might also like