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?
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 4 / 23
Motivation: the envisioned power grid our viewpoint
Projects at UCSB: power systems engineering networked control
1
detection and identication of faults & cyberphysical 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?
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 4 / 23
Motivation: the envisioned power grid our viewpoint
Projects at UCSB: power systems engineering networked control
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 5 / 23
Motivation: the envisioned power grid our viewpoint
Projects at UCSB: power systems engineering networked control
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 5 / 23
Motivation: the envisioned power grid our viewpoint
Projects at UCSB: power systems engineering networked control
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 linetoground 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 linetoground 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 60Hz 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 60Hz 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 highenergy 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 socalled 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. 911, 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 electricallyequivalent networks related in
terms of graph topology, spectrum, resistance, . . . ?
Applications of Kron reduction in smart grid problems?
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 6 / 23
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 cyberphysical 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
201114 NSF project CyberPhysical 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 7 / 23
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 cyberphysical 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
201114 NSF project CyberPhysical 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 7 / 23
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 7 / 23
Structurepreserving 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 linetoground 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 linetoground 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 60Hz 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 60Hz 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 highenergy 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 socalled 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. 911, 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 8 / 23
Structurepreserving power network model
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 9 / 23
Structurepreserving power network model
Classic structurepreserving 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 10 / 23
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 11 / 23
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
nonidentical natural frequencies
i
R
1
elastic coupling with strength K/n
x
x
x
1
2
S
1
K/n
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 12 / 23
Detour: Synchronization of coupled oscillators
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]
Deepbrain 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]
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 13 / 23
Detour: Synchronization of coupled oscillators
A wellunderstood 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 14 / 23
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
)
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 15 / 23
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
)
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]
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 15 / 23
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 15 / 23
Synchronization in the Kuramoto Model
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 16 / 23
Synchronization in the Kuramoto Model
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 nonuniformity, 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 17 / 23
Synchronization in the Kuramoto Model
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 18 / 23
Synchronization in the Kuramoto Model
Topological Kuramoto model
i
=
i
n
j =1
a
ij
sin(
i
j
)
Assume: coupling graph is
undirected and connected
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 nonuniformity sync
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 18 / 23
Synchronization in the Kuramoto Model
Topological Kuramoto model
i
=
i
n
j =1
a
ij
sin(
i
j
)
Assume: coupling graph is
undirected and connected
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 nonuniformity sync
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 18 / 23
Synchronization in the Kuramoto Model
Topological Kuramoto model
i
=
i
n
j =1
a
ij
sin(
i
j
)
Assume: coupling graph is
undirected and connected
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 nonuniformity sync
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 18 / 23
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 18 / 23
From the Kuramoto Model to the Power Network Model
1) Structurepreserving 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) Nonuniform variation of Kuramoto model on T
n+m
:
i
= P
i
n+m
j =1
P
ij
sin(
i
j
) , i {1, . . . , n + m}
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 19 / 23
From the Kuramoto Model to the Power Network Model
1) Structurepreserving 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) Nonuniform 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]
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 19 / 23
From the Kuramoto Model to the Power Network Model
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 secondorder Kuramoto oscillators (1.3) with
n = m (left plot) and the corresponding rstorder 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 secondorder oscillators converge exponentially to
the same nearby phaselocked equilibria (denoted by ) as predicted by Theorems 5.1 and 5.3.
(
,0
(t), 0
m1
). Hence, the phasesynchronized orbit (
,0
(t), 0
m1
), understood as
a geometric object in T
n
R
m
, constitutes a onedimensional equilibrium manifold of
the multirate Kuramoto model (5.11). After factoring out the translational invari
ance of the angular variable , the exponentiallysynchronized 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 rstorder multi
rate Kuramoto model (5.6) (formulated in a rotating frame with frequency
sync
)
and for the scaled Kuramoto model (5.8): the exponentiallysynchronized 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 multirate Kuramoto model (5.11), its rstorder 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 20 / 23
Main Synchronization Results
Structurepreserving 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 21 / 23
Main Synchronization Results
Structurepreserving 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 21 / 23
Main Synchronization Results
Structurepreserving 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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 21 / 23
Main Synchronization Results
Illustration with the IEEE Reliability Test System 96 under severe loading
220
309
310
120
103
209
102 102
118
307
302
216
202
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 22 / 23
Main Synchronization Results
Illustration with the IEEE Reliability Test System 96 under severe loading
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 22 / 23
Main Synchronization Results
Illustration with the IEEE Reliability Test System 96 under severe loading

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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 22 / 23
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 22 / 23
Conclusions
Structurepreserving
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
Networkreduced
power system model
Kron
reduction
Consensus
protocols
& robotic
coordination
Coupled
Kuramoto
oscillators
Open problem: sync in power networks
state, parameters, and topology of graph
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
F. Dorer & F. Bullo (UCSB) Synchronization in Power Networks Inst. for Energy Eciency 23 / 23