Abstract
In this paper, a battery energy storage system (BESS) based control method is proposed to improve the damping ratio of a target oscillation mode to a desired level by charging or discharging the installed BESS using local measurements. The expected damping improvement by BESS is derived analytically for both a single-machine-infinite-bus system and a multi-machine system. This BESS-based approach is tested on a four-generator, two-area power system. Effects of the power converter limit, response time delay, power system stabilizers and battery state-of-charge on the control performance are also investigated. Simulation results validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Power system oscillation, whose frequency typically ranges from 0.2 to 2.5 Hz, often occurs in interconnected power grids, and is one of the major concerns in power system operations [1]. The phenomenon of power system oscillation can be caused by many factors such as insufficient system damping, forced oscillation [2], external periodic load perturbation [3], parametric resonance [4] and modal interaction [5], etc. Conventionally, this problem can be partially solved by fine-tuning the parameters of power system stabilizers (PSSs) of the involved generators. However, for an interconnected bulk power system, the offline tuning of PSS parameters of different generators by a coordinated scheme may involve the regulatory entities from different regions that require high-standard cooperation and information sharing. Furthermore, many researchers proposed to use a centralized control system for online tuning PSSs. However, this approach will also introduce the problems of the time delay and communication cost among different interconnected areas. An alternative option for oscillation damping is to use local flexible AC transmission system (FACTS) devices such as static var compensator (SVC), thyristor controlled series capacitor (TCSC), and static synchronous compensator (STATCOM) to provide extra damping support for the system [6,7,8]. Basically, those are passive elements/sources alleviating oscillations mainly by controlling reactive power or changing the line admittance.
With the fast development of energy storage and power electronics technologies, many utility-scale battery energy storage systems (BESSs) have been deployed in the power system industry and have participated in the power markets. As an active source, the BESS can be used for balancing the power systems to provide the ancillary services. In normal conditions of a power system, a BESS is operated in the normal state, i.e. either charging or discharging in a scheduled mode. However, due to their considerable initial investment, its function can be further exploited not only as a system balancing unit, but also to provide extra damping for system oscillations.
Some studies have been reported in recent literatures [9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. In [11], the analysis and design of a BESS controller for a two-machine system are discussed and tested, but the analysis for general multi-machine systems is not comprehensively covered. Designing the damping controller based on certain damping-torque relationships and indices is also a focused topic [12]. Those indices can be regarded as a generalization of the damping-torque coefficients in a single machine infinite bus (SMIB) system and can be combined with classic residual methods [13] in designing the PSS. Regarding robust control for damping oscillation by BESS, there are two mainstreams: linear and nonlinear robust control. In [14], the linear matrix inequality (LMI) method is used, which requires the solving of an optimization problem. In [15], the Port-Hamiltonian formulation and the related controller design method are applied on BESS to improve the transient stability.
This paper investigates this problem from an alternative view point, i.e. symbolically solving the equations regarding eigenvalues and then applying the analytical results on the design of the BESS based damping controller. Typically, the inter-area oscillation mode is the main concern for system operators and can be extremely harmful to power system reliability, which is required high priority to be damped. The method proposed here can damp a target mode to an expected damping ratio and, meanwhile, will not worsen other oscillation modes.
The remaining parts of this paper are organized as follows. In Sect. 2, based on the analysis of the power-electronics converter of a BESS, the model is simplified by a proper approximation. In Sect. 3, the linearized state-space model for a power system with a BESS is derived and the eigenvalues are solved. The solution is then used to design the controller to improve the damping ratio of a target mode to an expected value. Section 4 evaluates the effectiveness of the proposed method on both the SMIB system and the two-area system. Conclusions and discussions about the future work are given in Sect. 5.
2 BESS model for system oscillation study
Typically, a BESS includes a storage part comprised of battery cells and a converter interface called a power conditioning system (PCS), as shown in Fig. 1. The PCS is essentially the set of power converters used to maintain the pre-specified voltage and power output. For the BESS, the PCS is typically composed of a DC/DC converter mainly used for battery charging/discharging control and a DC/AC converter (voltage source converter) mainly used for the AC-grid integration with desired voltage and power output.
Since most grid related control strategies are implemented in the DC/AC stage, in this paper, the PCS is modeled as voltage source converter focusing on the DC/AC part.
2.1 Storage part: battery cells
A battery can be modeled as an equivalent voltage source with the voltage dependent on the state of charge (SOC). Its equivalent circuit model considering SOC is shown in Fig. 2. Assumptions for this model are: ① the battery can never be discharged to a level under 20%. In this case the voltage is assumed to be linearly dependent on the SOC as shown in Fig. 3 [16]; ② the internal resistance is assumed to be a constant impedance Z, since it is typically very small when the battery is used in high power applications.
With the above assumptions, the equation for the battery is given as:
where Emin is the cell voltage when fully discharged; Emax is the cell voltage when fully charged; Z is the cell internal resistance; I is the cell discharge (> 0)/charge (< 0) current; Vt is the cell terminal voltage.
In power industry applications, the cell should be protected from deep charging/discharging for life-span consideration. An allowable depth of discharge (DOD) is typically 75% or 80% [17]. Thus, a preferable range of SOC is [20%, 80%] in this paper.
2.2 PCS: P-Q decoupled control
The classic P-Q decoupled control strategy has been widely applied [18, 19]. Figure 4 shows the basic control idea of the outer loop using the signal of frequency or voltage deviation to generate reference values for the inner loop. The inner-loop then generates the pulse width modulation (PWM) signal for the power converter, where Pref and Qref are the reference values. In this paper, the proposed method focuses on devising the Pref. The inner loop structure as shown in Fig. 5 is the same as the classic P-Q decoupled control scheme, which can be found in literature [18, 19]; thus, its details are not expanded here.
2.3 Power output model for BESS
The proposed damping controller adjusts the active power output meanwhile maintaining the BESS reactive output to zero, since the active power and system frequency are highly correlated [20]. Thus, the local generator speed (or approximately the terminal bus frequency) deviation can be used as the input signal for Pref :
In a typical P-Q decoupled control scheme, the active and reactive power can be regulated to their reference values. On the other hand, usually: (1) the response of the power-electronics device (i.e. switching on/off) is much faster than the dynamics of most electromechanical devices, such as synchronous generators; (2) the controller time constants, (e.g. the integral time constants of the PI controller) are typically much smaller than both the cycles of line frequency (e.g. 0.02 s) and the periods of the electromechanical oscillation modes (frequency in the range of 0.2–2.5 Hz). Thus the power output of the BESS can be modeled by a first order transfer function in the power system oscillation study [9, 18] as shown in Fig. 6, where Tes is the time constant of the BESS power response.
2.4 Effect of T es on proposed damping control
The effect of Tes is slightly reducing the desired damping ratio of the target mode, which will be verified in later sections. Tes usually ranges from 0.01 s to 0.05 s, depending on different specifications of the BESS. Thus, in the following section of small signal analysis, Tes will be set temporarily to zero during the mathematic derivation, while given as 0.05 s in simulations. Since Tes is much smaller than the inertia time constant of a generator [18, 21], in the following analysis, the actual power output of the BESS is approximated by the power output reference, i.e.:
3 Proposed BESS based damping control
The basic idea of the proposed damping control is:
-
1)
Deriving the analytic relationship between the gain kes in BESS damping controller and the damping ratio ξ for a target oscillation mode.
-
2)
Implementing that gain in the outer-loop controller of the BESS placed nearby the generator’s terminal bus.
In the following part, the SMIB system will be investigated first to derive the damping control algorithm. Then, the algorithm will be extended to multi-machine systems having a BESS placed near each generator.
3.1 BESS in SMIB system
3.1.1 Case 1: BESS at generator terminal bus
In Fig. 7, x1 is the sum of the generator transient reactance xd′ and the transformer reactance xT, and x is the transmission line reactance.
The system differential algebraic equations (DAEs) are:
where Ω0 = 377 rad/s for 60 Hz system; ω is the generator angular frequency and δ is the rotor angle; E′q is the transient q-axis voltage of the generator. Pm and Pe are the mechanic power and electric power respectively. Pes is the active power output of energy storage. M (= 2H) is the generator inertia time constant. The last equation holds approximately in the SMIB system, in which the generator connected to the infinite bus by a long transmission line, i.e. x′d + xT << x.
Then, linearize (4) around the equilibrium (the quantities with subscript “0” represent the steady-state value, which can be solved from the power flow solution).
Linearize ΔPe w.r.t. two state variables Δδ and Δω:
where K1 and K2 are constant coefficients to be determined. Substitute them into the swing equation (5):
Apply Laplace transformation to the swing equation and assume the mechanical power input of generator does not change, i.e. ΔPm = 0 [21]:
Then, the characteristic equation is:
Compare it with the standard characteristic equation of a second-order system,
Then, consider M = 2H in the above expression, we have:
In practice, D needs to be estimated from real system data [23]. For simulation studies, it can be treated as zero if generation and load are modeled in detail [20, 21]. Consider D = 0 here, then:
Therefore, the damping ratio ξ is related to K2, i.e. the partial derivative of Pe to ω. From the last equation in (5), it then leads to:
Thus, by (13) and (14) the relationship between ξ and kes is:
3.1.2 Case 2: BESS at general locations
Now consider a more general case. As shown in Fig. 8, x1 = x′d + xT + xline-1, x2 = xline-2, where xline-1 + xline-2 = x (i.e. the total reactance of the previous transmission line).
The following (16) and (17) can be derived based on the power balance equation.
By linearizing (16) and (17), the following expression is finally obtained after some manipulation:
The coefficient K8 can be named as the “location effect constant” and its expression is given in (19). Then, to check the correctness of this formula for Case 1, letting x1 = 0 and K8 becomes − 1 as shown in (20) and (21).
It can be noticed that in (21), the coefficient of Δω is exactly the same as that in Case 1 when neglecting x1. Finally, kes is given by:
To investigate the impact of the BESS installing location, denote k = x1/(x1 + x2). δ is the rotor angle of the generator, typically within [− π/2, π/2] [20, 21]; E′q, is the generator transient q-axis voltage with a typical range [0.5, 2.5].
Figure 9 depicts how − K8 changes w.r.t. k for different combinations of δ and E′q. − K8 achieves its maximum value 1.0 at x1 = 0. When the specified damping ratio ξ is given, the larger − K8 leads to smaller kes. Since kes represents the BESS energy injection/absorption per unit time, a smaller kes means a smaller BESS discharge/charge depth. This will be more attractive for utility companies and system planners, i.e. the BESS can be used as an ancillary service for oscillation damping with potentially lower energy cost.
3.2 BESS in multi-machine system
3.2.1 Small signal state space model
In an n-generator system, similar to the SMIB case, the BESS device can be installed at the terminal buses or nearby buses of generators. As shown in Fig. 10. Pei, Pesi, Pgi are the electromagnetic power, the BESS output power and active power output of the ith generator respectively.
Apply the reduced network technique [20] by keeping only the generator buses, the system model is:
where \(\varvec{M}^{ - 1} = {\text{diag}}[M_{i}^{ - 1} ]_{n \times n}\); \(\varvec{\varOmega}= {\text{diag}}[\varOmega_{0} ]_{n \times n}\); \(\varvec{\delta}= [\delta_{i} ]_{n \times 1}\); \(\varvec{\omega}= [\omega_{i} ]_{n \times 1}\); \(\varvec{P}_{e} = [P_{ei} ]_{n \times 1}\); \(\varvec{P}_{m} = [P_{mi} ]_{n \times 1}\); \(\varvec{P}_{es} = [P_{esi} ]_{n \times 1}\); \(\varvec{P}_{g} = [P_{gi} ]_{n \times 1}\); \(\varvec{D}{ = }\text{diag} { (}D_{1} , D_{2} , \cdots ,D_{n} )\); Di is the damping constant for the ith generator; Pgi can be approximately expressed by [20]:
where Gij and Bij are the real and imaginary part of the Yij in the reduced nodal admittance matrix [21].
Power output of each BESS in a compact form are:
where \(\varvec{K}_{es} = {\text{diag}}[k_{esi} ]_{n \times n} , \, k_{esi} \ge 0\).
Then, linearize the above equations around the equilibrium point:
Here, the Jacobian matrix Jp is:
3.2.2 Analytic eigenvalue solutions
Step 1: Determinant simplification
From above section, the 2n-by-2n system matrix A is:
The eigenvalues λ are the roots of the determinant equation:
where I is the identity matrix of n-by-n.
Then the following block matrix lemma is utilized to derive the analytic solution. Its proof can be found in [24].
For matrix \(\varvec{M} = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c} \varvec{A} & \varvec{B} \\ \varvec{C} & \varvec{D} \\ \end{array} } \right)\), if \(\varvec{CD} = \varvec{DC}\), then
To apply this lemma to (29), it requires:
Denoting \(\varvec{S} = \varvec{M}^{ - 1} (\varvec{D} + \varvec{K}_{es} )\), it is easy to see that S is a diagonal matrix. If S is equal-diagonal, i.e. S = diag[S]n×n:
Then, it is easy to verify that (30) can hold.
Thus, if the unknowns kesi are selected based on (31), then (32) can be obtained:
For matrix product M−1JP, by eigenvalue decomposition [23], it can be transformed to:
where μi is the eigenvalue of M−1JP. The real matrix JP is semi-definite and nearly symmetric [13]. M−1 is diagonal. By matrix theory, μi is real non-negative number and the above diagonalization process can be guaranteed [24].
Step 2: Analytic solution of each eigenvalue
Apply the Laplace theorem [24] for the determinant of product matrices on (32):
Thus, eigenvalues of the original system are the roots for each of the above n quadratic equations, i.e.:
Furthermore,
Step 3: Calculate kesi
To make (31) hold, suppose the kth mode is our target mode (this can be easily identified by its natural oscillation frequency ωnk). Then substitute S = 2ξkωnk into (31):
Especially when \(\,D_{i} = 0\,\; \Rightarrow \, \,\,k_{esi} = 4H_{i} \xi_{k} \omega_{nk}\).
4 Simulation study
4.1 SMIB system
To test the proposed method for the general location case, the system parameter for the SMIB system are: x1 = x′d + xT1 = 0.05 + 0.10 = 0.15, x2 = 0.35, k = x1/(x1 + x2) = 0.3, i.e. about 1/3 of the electric distance between generator and infinity bus. Note that here x1 is not much smaller than x2. Mechanical input power Pm = 1.0 p.u., D = 0 and the nominal frequency f0 = 60 Hz. K8 = 0.71898 by (19).
Two groups of tests on the SMIB system with BESS under different generator inertia parameters (H = 5 s and H = 10 s) are performed targeting at 5% damping ratio. A three-phase fault is applied at infinite bus from 1 s and cleared at 1.1 s. Prony analysis is used to estimate the actual damping ratio from generator angle and speed waveforms. The results can closely match the expected damping ratio as shown in Table 1. Figure 11 illustrates the 20% damping ratio case to compare with the original system without BESS. Note that a damping ratio of 5% is usually enough for power system operations; here the test damping ratio ranges from 5% to 40% in order to verify the accuracy of the derived formula by simulations.
If the impact of Tes, i.e. the converter time constant, is considered, generally it will slightly reduce the expected damping ratio. In real power converters, Tes can be up to 50 ms. Consider the worst case here i.e. Tes = 50 ms. The result is listed in Table 2 for the case with H = 5 s.
From Table 2, the maximum reduction of damping ratio is only 20.16% − 19.26% = 0.009 for 20% case, so the negative impact of Tes is not severe for the proposed control method. A comparison on the active power output of the BESS for ξ = 20% is shown in Fig. 12.
4.2 Two-area system
In this section, the Kundur’s two-area system model [21] is used to investigate the performance of the proposed method on a multi-machine power system. The single line diagram is shown in Fig. 13. The simulation model is built in DIgSILENT/PowerFactory. The battery storage device is modeled by the DIgSILENT simulation language (DSL) [22].
By modal analysis, the system has three oscillation modes: (1) 0.548 Hz with a damping ratio of 4.38%, is an inter-area mode between Area-1 (G1, G2) and Area-2 (G3, G4); (2) 1.002 Hz with a damping ratio of 4.86%; (3) 1.036 Hz with a damping ratio of 4.92%. The last two are local modes. The 0.548 Hz mode has the weakest damping, so its damping ratio needs to be improved. In simulation, a temporary three-phase ground fault is added at bus-8 at 2 sec and cleared after 0.02 s. The objective damping ratio is set to 5%. By (37), the kesi (i = 1~4) is:
where ξ1* = 5% and ξ1 is 4.38%, ωn1 = 2πfn1 is the natural oscillation frequency for mode-1, i.e. the target mode.
4.2.1 Case a: adding BESS in original system
Control effects on three modes are shown in Table 3. It can be observed that the damping ratios of all the three modes have been improved. The improvement for the target mode is the most significant and reaches the 5% goal.
In Table 4, the performance of the proposed method is tested for expected damping ratios changing from 5% to 10%. Each result is close to the expectation.
4.2.2 Case b: impact of converter power limit
Either for the sake of protecting the power switch device due to their thermal limits or other technical reasons, a realistic power converter will have a power limit, which may have impact on the control effect of the proposed method. On the other hand, utility-scale power converter output levels have been improved in recent years allowing the maximum power limit to reach 5 MW for single utility scale power converter [17, 25]. If considering aggregating configuration of multi-converters like in a wind farm or battery park [25], this limit can be enhanced to 30 MW [25].
To investigate the power limit impact on the proposed control, similar tests are done with results listed in Table 5.
To visually inspect the nonlinear effect of converter power limit, the following case study is presented with a 10% damping ratio requirement for the target mode. Typically, that means more and faster energy injection/absorption from the BESS than 5% damping ratio requirement.
The power limit is set to 3 MW for each BESS. The BESS power output result is shown in Fig. 14. From the plots, it shows that each BESS is in charging state nearly all the time during this disturbance.
The relative generator rotor angles are shown in Fig. 15. Gen-1 and Gen-4 belong to different areas. Thus, δ14 mainly reflects the target mode at 0.548 Hz; the other two modes (1.002 Hz and 1.036 Hz) are mainly caused by oscillations between local generators inside each area, as shown by δ12 and δ34 respectively. Damping improvement for δ14 is the most significant. The damping ratios for other two relative angles are also improved. This phenomenon verifies the control effect and is in consistence with the previous modal analysis result.
4.2.3 Case c: impact of converter time constant T es
Like the previous study in SMIB case, the Tes is set to 50 ms. To better demonstrate the impact of Tes, no converter power limit is assumed here. Results are shown in Table 6.
In Table 6, as expected, the effect of Tes is to slightly lower down the damping ratio, and its largest error is only 9.79% − 9.688% ≈ 0.001. This magnitude of error is acceptable in practical power system operations. This result again validates the assumption that, in the proposed method, the converter time constant can be ignored during the analytic formula derivation with small errors introduced. In Table 7, effect on each mode is listed. The target mode can meet the 5% damping ratio goal with other two modes slightly improved as in Table 3.
The BESS power responses are shown in Fig. 16.
4.2.4 Error analysis
The absolute percentage error (APE) of the damping ratio (|Δe| = |ξ − ξ*|/|ξ*|) for the above three cases are compared in Fig. 17, from which there are following observations: ① the APE for each case is below 5% which can satisfy practical engineering needs; ② the power converter time constant Tes has slightly more influence on the accuracy of the proposed method than other factors, because in the second subplot of Fig. 18, the mean values of APE for the three cases are respectively 1.20%, 1.65% and 1.85%, where the mean APE of case-c considering Tes is the largest; ③ the APE will slightly increase with the increase of the desired damping ratio. This can be explained because the proposed BESS controller is essentially a linear type. For most systems, a 5% to 10% damping ratio will be sufficient and reasonable for small-signal stability.
4.2.5 Case study on power system with PSSs
In a real power system, there could be multiple existing PSSs for oscillation damping control. To investigate the damping improvement by the proposed BESS controller on such a system, each generator in the two-area system is equipped with a PSS. All PSSs are designed to make the damping ratio of the target mode reach 4.99% without BESS. Suppose that a higher damping ratio is expected by adding the proposed controller. Then, the new damping ratio goal is set from 6% to 10%, respectively, to design the controller based on (37). The test results are in Table 8. The APE of the damping ratio is depicted in Fig. 18, which are all less than 2%. Note that here ξ1 in (37) becomes 4.99%, so the calculated value of kes is smaller than its values in previous case studies without a PSS. Since the kes can be interpreted as the power output coefficient of the BESS converter during the disturbance, a smaller kes means a smaller converter capacity required for the BESS. Since the converter capacity takes a major portion of the overall cost of a BESS, the investment on the BESS for damping control in a power system that already has PSSs can be decreased.
4.2.6 Impact on battery SOC
Consider the worst case in subsection-b, i.e. with 3 MW converter power limit for each BESS and 10% damping ratio requirement for the target mode. In Fig. 15, it is observed that the battery is mainly charged during the disturbance. The energy charged is nothing but the area under the power (absorption) curve during disturbance as shown in Fig. 19 (red section) of the zoom-in plot for − Pes4.
For example, for BESS-4, the energy absorbed is:
To evaluate the impact on SOC, assume a small energy capacity for BESS-4 (SOCs of other three BESS units can be calculated similarly) as 0.5 MWh (in utility scale BESS, this value can be larger [17, 25]). Then:
Depth of charge = 0.0016/0.5 = 0.0032.
A typical SOC range is [0.2, 0.8]. Thus the theoretical maximum and minimum new SOC are respectively:
SOCnew,max = 0.8 + 0.0032 = 0.8032, and the relatively change is only: 0.0032/0.8 = 0.4%;
SOCnew,min = 0.2 + 0.0032 = 0.2032, and the relatively change is only: 0.0032/0.2 = 1.6%.
Thus, in both cases the impact on SOC is small, implying that using a BESS for oscillation damping may not weaken its available capacity for other functions like load following/balancing because the energy provided/absorbed by oscillation is much smaller than the total BESS capacity during disturbance. Moreover, a small portion of energy means potentially a low cost in using BESS for damping oscillation. Due to this fact, the BESS is very promising as a new kind of ancillary service in providing auxiliary damping when needed.
5 Conclusion
This paper proposed a novel damping control method based on the usage of BESS. Analytic eigenvalue solutions were derived on both the SMIB and multi-machine systems. Controller based on those solutions was verified successfully by simulation. The results demonstrated a promising performance in damping target oscillation mode with quantifiable improvement of damping ratio. Thus, to alleviate system oscillations by providing extra damping support based on the proposed method is validated.
Future work includes time delay compensation of the converter time constant for higher control accuracy and studying potential combination of other successful methods like robust control considering parameters uncertainty.
References
Kothari DP, Nagrath IJ (2011) Modern power system analysis. Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi
Wang B, Sun K (2017) Location methods of oscillation sources in power systems: a survey. J Mod Power Syst Clean Energy 5(2):151–159
Rostamkolai N, Piwko RJ, Matusik AS (1994) Evaluation of the impact of a large cyclic load on the LILCO power system using time simulation and frequency domain techniques. IEEE Trans Power Syst 9(3):1411–1415
Kakimoto N, Nakanishi A, Tomiyama K (2004) Instability of interarea oscillation mode by autoparametric resonance. IEEE Trans Power Syst 19(4):1961–1970
Lin CM, Vittal V, Kliemann W et al (1996) Investigation of modal interaction and its effects on control performance in stressed power systems using normal forms of vector fields. IEEE Trans Power Syst 11(2):781–787
Vahidnia A, Ledwich G, Palmer EW (2016) Transient stability improvement through wide-area controlled SVCs. IEEE Trans Power Syst 31(4):1395–1406
Wang KY, Crow ML (2011) Power system voltage regulation via STATCOM internal nonlinear control. IEEE Trans Power Syst 26(3):1252–1262
Zhang X, Tomsovic K, Dimitrovski A (2016) Optimal investment on series FACTS device considering contingencies. In: Proceedings of the 48th North American power symposium (NAPS), Denver, USA, 18–20 September 2016, 6 pp
Pal BC, Coonick AH, Macdonald DC (2000) Robust damping controller design in power systems with superconducting magnetic energy storage devices. IEEE Trans Power Syst 15(1):320–325
Sui XC, Tang YF, He HB et al (2014) Energy-storage-based low-frequency oscillation damping control using particle swarm optimization and heuristic dynamic programming. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(5):2539–2548
Beza M, Bongiorno M (2015) An adaptive power oscillation damping controller by STATCOM with energy storage. IEEE Trans Power Syst 30(1):484–493
Shi LJ, Lee KY, Wu F (2016) Robust ESS-based stabilizer design for damping inter-area oscillations in multimachine power systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 31(2):1395–1406
Pai MA (1989) Energy function analysis for power system stability. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston
Fang J, Yao W, Chen Z et al (2014) Design of anti-windup compensator for energy storage-based damping controller to enhance power system stability. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(3):1175–1185
Kanchanaharuthai A, Chankong V, Loparo KA (2015) Transient stability and voltage regulation in multimachine power systems vis-à-vis STATCOM and battery energy storage. IEEE Trans Power Syst 30(5):2404–2416
Rechargable Batteries Applications Handbook (1992) Technical report, technical marketing staff of Gates Energy Products Inc. Butterworth-Heinemann
Robyns B, François B, Delille G (2015) Energy storage in electric power grids. Wiley, Hoboken
Neely JC, Byrne RH, Elliott RT et al (2013) Damping of inter-area oscillations using energy storage. In: Proceedings of IEEE power and energy society general meeting, Vancouver, Canada, 21–25 July 2013, 5 pp
Zhang L (2010) Modeling and control of VSC-HVDC links connected to weak AC systems. Dissertation, KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm
Anderson PM (2002) Power system control and stability. Wiley-IEEE, Piscataway
Kundur P (1994) Power system stability and control. McGraw Hill, New York
DIgSILENT PowerFactory User Manual (2013) DIgSILENT GmbH, Gomaringen, Germany
Fan L, Wehbe Y (2013) Extended Kalman filtering based real-time dynamic state and parameter estimation using PMU data. Electric Power Syst Res 103:168–177
Horn RA (1990) Matrix analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York
Battery storage power station.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_storage_power_station. Accessed 20 Feb 2017
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the ERC Program of the NSF and DOE under NSF Grant EEC-1041877 and in part by NSF Grant ECCS-1553863.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
CrossCheck date: 7 November 2017
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
ZHU, Y., LIU, C., WANG, B. et al. Damping control for a target oscillation mode using battery energy storage. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 6, 833–845 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40565-017-0371-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40565-017-0371-3