Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

Distributed Active and Reactive Power Transfer for

Voltage Regulation using V2G System


Ezhil Reena Joy

Kannan Thirugnanam

Mukesh Singh

Praveen Kumar

Department of EEE
IITGuwahati
India

Singapore University of
Technology & Design
Singapore

Department of EEE
IITGuwahati
India

Department of EEE
IITGuwahati
India

AbstractThe increased penetration of electric vehicle (EVs)


may results in voltage rise or drop at the distribution node (DN).
If EVs are charged at a place to be called as charging station
(CS), the vehicle to grid (V2G) concept can be easily achieved.
This paper presents an active and reactive power control in V2G
system based on node voltage variations and energy availability
of EVs batteries. It addresses the problem of voltage rise or drop
that occurs in real time, due to the sudden arrival and departure
of EVs. Voltage profile evaluations have been done with active
and reactive power considering a large fleet of EVs to foresee the
CS behavior. Finally, validation of the study is carried out using
a realistic distribution system of a typical city considering 100
EVs of different battery ratings connected at the DN via CS.
Index TermsCharging station, distribution node, electric
vehicle, fuzzy logic controller, grid-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-grid.

I. I NTRODUCTION

ITH the wide spread adoption of electric vehicle (EVs),


vehicle to grid (V2G) system has become one of the
key issue, which enables EVs to serve both as load and the
power source [1]. A cluster of EVs can be represented as
a load and a well-defined source of energy comparable in
reliability to fossil-fuel based power plants [2]. Therefore, it
is required to develop a V2G system which can handle large
penetration of EVs at the distribution node (DN) [3]. This is
realized when an aggregated EVs energy is used in controlled
fashion to discharge the excess energy of the batteries to the
grid or by charging in bulk [1], [4]. This can be achieved
when the charging station (CS) is situated near the DN in a
parking lot with a charging bay. The parking lot can be a
residential complex or office complex or shopping complex.
In a parking lot, the EVs tend to stay for longer duration
and thereby V2G concept can be achieved. Therefore, the CS
should be designed in such a way that it should be capable of
handling the sudden arrival and departure of EVs, which will
have significant impact on the node voltage [5], [6].
In literature, much attention has been paid to prove the
validity of V2G systems in terms of frequency regulation
[7], [8]. Han et al have designed an optimal aggregator
to achieve the frequency regulation. In [9][12], the V2G
control algorithm is developed for scheduling the charging
and discharging of EVs batteries for autonomous distributed
V2G systems. A very few works have been done on voltage

c 2015 IEEE
978-1-4673-9130-6/15/$31.00 

regulation issue in V2G system. It has been observed, there


has not been much technical analysis about the active and
reactive power control to regulate the voltage in the DN. If
the EVs batteries exchange active as well as reactive power
to the distribution network, a better coordination and control
can be achieved.
With the larger penetration of EVs, the energy stored in
EVs batteries are capable of providing active as well as
reactive power for stabilizing the DN voltage, which has been
studied in this work. In order to simplify the model and to
reduce the computing time, the CS is modeled at the system
level; hence converters required for charging or discharging
the EVs have not been designed. The CS considered in this
work has many charging points, where multiple EVs come to
charge or discharge their batteries. A fuzzy controller and an
aggregator is used in the CS for achieving the control and
coordination of the complete system. The FLC decides the
total power to be injected or drawn from the grid. The aggregator distributes the power among EVs of different ratings.
The main idea of this work is to inject or draw necessary
active and reactive power from or to EVs, so as to maintain
the DN voltage profile. To demonstrate the importance of the
proposed approach, a realistic radial distribution system data
of Guwahati city is used [13]. Simulation has been done to
prove the validity of the approach, which indeed has been
tested with a CS of 100 EVs of different ratings connected
with the DN of Guwahati city.
II. VOLTAGE R EGULATION AT D ISTRIBUTION N ODE
Large penetration of EVs will have direct impacts on the
distribution system, which causes excess voltage rise or drop
at the DN. Since the voltage of the distribution network is
based on radial power flow; this affects various nodes of
the distribution system. These voltage rise or drop can be
unavoidable, but it can be minimized when the CS is operated
in a controlled and coordinated manner. The distribution
network operator is obliged to maintain the voltage profile
within its limits (10.06). Therefore, before connecting CS
with the DN, the distribution network operators should ensure
that the DN voltage will not be affected by the bulk charging
or discharging of EVs.
Fig. 1 illustrates the single line diagram of the simplified
distribution network connected to the CS together with the

AC

V1

V2

Z = R + jX

strategy, which is very much essential for the implementation


of EVs charging systems.

PL QL
CS

Subfeeder
node

III. D ISTRIBUTION N ODE VOLTAGE C ONTROL

Fig. 1: Illustration of CS connected at the DN.

local load (PL QL ) by an overhead line cable with impedance


Z. The steady state voltage drop between bus A and bus B
can be calculated as given by (1).
V1 = V2 + I(R + jX)
I=

Pnet jQnet
V1

(1)
(2)

where, V1 is the voltage at bus A, V2 is the injected or drawn


voltage from the CS, I is the total injected or drawn current
from or to the CS. R and X are the resistance and reactance
of the line. Pnet and Qnet are the net power drawn or injected
from or to the grid. On substituting Eq. (2) in Eq.(1), the DN
voltage can be written as given by Eq. (3).


Pnet Qnet
V1 = V2 +
(R + jX)
(3)
V1
Where, Pnet = (P (PL Pcs ) and Qnet = (Q (QL Qcs ) and
P, PL and Pcs represents the active power of the DN, load and
CS. Q, QL and Qcs represents the reactive power of the DN,
load and CS. To indicate the power flow between CS and the
DN, appropriate signs for active and reactive power are used.
Power is positive when it is drawn from the grid and power
is negative when it is injected from the EVs batteries. By
substituting, Pnet and Qnet in Eq. (3), the DN voltage can be
rewritten as given by Eq. (4).


(P (PL Pcs )) j (Q (QL Qcs ))
(R + jX)
V1 = V2 +
V1
(4)
Since the angle between V1 and V2 is very small, the voltage
drop is approximately equal to the real part of the drop.
Therefore, the above equation can be approximated as given
by Eq. (5).
V1 V2 +

R (P (PL Pcs )) + X (Q (QL Qcs ))


V1

(5)

In Eq. 5, if V1 is considered as the base voltage, then V1 can


be assumed as unity. Therefore, DN voltage can be further
approximated as given by Eq. (6).
V1 V2 + R (P (PL Pcs )) + X (Q (QL Qcs ))

(6)

Theoretically, Eq. (6) describes the voltage rise or drop at


the point of connection of the CS. This equation can be
used to quantitatively analyze the relationship between the
voltage at the subfeeder node and the V2G system. Therefore,
before interconnecting CS the sudden arrival of bulk EVs to
charge or discharge must be investigated. A precise way of
analyzing the voltage variations in the DN is by making a real
time simulation model of CS with suitable operational control

It can be seen, Eq. (6) is governed by DN voltage (V2 ),


impedance of the line (R + jX) and active and reactive power
flow of the line. Theoretically, the voltage regulation can be
achieved by adjusting either V2 , R and or X, active power,
reactive power or both. Adjusting the substation voltage may
cause adverse impact on any of its customer. While changing
frequently the tap changer and autotransformer may affect
the EVs with varying state-of-charge (SOC) and charge or
discharge rate (Crate) conditions. Upgrading the conductor
size is an effective approach, but it is very expensive. As
an alternate solution, the DN voltage can be more effectively
controlled, if the CS can exchange relatively large Qcs . This
may results in higher currents and losses in the subfeeder. In
this case, CS do not work anymore at unity power factor(pf).
Managing the voltage profile in DN by Qcs control alone
can be justified in some cases, nevertheless its application is
limited because distribution network operator may stipulate
the CS to operate at or close to unity pf. Generally, for the
distribution network, X/R ratio tends to be low (typically
1), so neither RPnet and XQnet is negligible. V1 is particulary
sensitive for Qcs rather than Pcs . Therefore, both Pcs and Qcs
control would play a vital role to regulate the voltage at the
DN. The utility should ensure to draw or inject maximum
Pcs at minimum Qcs . Both Pcs and Qcs should be regulated
and controlled by injecting or drawing the power. In addition,
the control logic works depending on the requirements; by
minimizing the losses in the network. This can be achieved
by either controlling the V2 and phase angle () between V1
and V2 or current (I2 ) and pf angle ().
A. CS Voltage (V2 ) and phase angle () control
In this control logic, Pcs and Qcs is regulated by adjusting
the CS voltage (V2 ) and the phase angle (). The active power
is provided by the grid as long as V2 lags V1 and it is send back
to the grid as long as V1 lags V2 . Thus, determines the amount
of active power transfer and the magnitude difference would
cause reactive power flow. Hence, the net power delivered from
the CS (Scs ) to the DN is estimated using Eq. (7).
V2 (V2 V1 cos())
V2V1 sin()
+j
(7)
X
X
where, is the phase angle between V1 and V2 . The real part
of Eq. (7) represents the net Pcs transfer and the imaginary part
represents the net Qcs transfer, which is given by Eq. (8) and
Eq. (9). In this equation, the maximum Pcs transfer happens,
when = 90o and the maximum Qcs occurs when V1 and V2
are in phase i.e., = 0o .
Scs =

V2V1 sin()
X
V2 (V2 V1 cos())
Qcs = j
X
Pcs =

(8)
(9)

B. Current (I2 ) and power angle control () control

B. Battery System Design

In this control logic, Pcs and Qcs are regulated by adjusting


the current (I2 ) and the pf angle (). The net power delivered
from the CS to the DN is estimated using Eq. (10). From
which, active and reactive power (Pcs and Qcs ) injected or
drawn is given by Eq. (11) and Eq. (12).

An electric circuit based battery model has been used


for representing the aggregated model of EV battery pack.
This model is based on a controlled voltage source, which
can be positive or negative depending on the power flow.
Positive power represents, drawing the power from the grid,
by charging the battery and negative power means injecting
the power to support the grid, by discharging the battery.
The parameters of the equivalent circuit (R1 , R2 , C and V0 )
are calculated by polynomial equation explained in [14]. The
required energy to charge and the available energy to discharge
the ith EV battery for a specified time is calculated from Eq.
(13) and Eq. (14).
i
= Vti Qi ((SOCmax SOCcr )/100)
(13)
Ereq
i
Eavail = Vti Qi ((SOCcr SOCmin)/100)
(14)

Scs = V2 I2 cos + jV2 I2 sin

(10)

Pcs = V2 I2 cos

(11)

Qcs = V2 I2 sin

(12)

where, = cos1 (p f ). The current in the system is controlled


to control the Pcs and Qcs to be supplied or injected to or from
the CS based on the pf of the system. The pf of the system is
updated to regulate the required amount of Pcs and Qcs flow in
the system. Thus, maximum Pcs and Qcs transfer happens in
the system at unity and zero pf. As the CS has been modeled at
the system level, second logic has been used in this work. The
battery system design and the detailed methodology adapted
in the control strategy has been explained in the later sections.
IV. F RAME W ORK O F V2G S YSTEM
A. Layout of charging station
To represent the bulk charging of EVs in the CS, this
study has considered 100 EVs. A real time simulation model
of CS has been built for charging or discharging of EVs
batteries. The system schematic and its associated controllers
with aggregator are shown in Fig. 2. The developed system
shown in figure has the ability to control the power flow
of each EVs present in the CS. As the CS is modeled at
the system level; the fuzzy controller decides the amount
of magnitude and direction of power flow which should be
compensated by the CS.
Distribution Node
(DN)

V1
EbT

CS

FLC

SbT
EbT

..
.

Aggregator

Sb1
Sbn

. . .
Eb1

Ebn

Fig. 2: Layout of controlled V2G system.

The frame work of the CS consists of FLC based controller


and an aggregator connected with the CS. FLC receives input
from DN voltage of the grid and the total energy availability
of EVs batteries (EbT ) at the CS. The output of the FLC is the
total power (SbT ), which has to be compensated by the CS. The
power decided by the FLC is divided by the aggregator. The
aggregator takes SbT , EbT and energy available (Eb1 , Eb2 ...Ebn )
from individual EVs batteries and distributes the power (Sb1,
Sb2 ...Sbn) among EVs present at the CS.

Here Qi is the rated ampere hour rating (AHR) of the ith


battery, Vti is the terminal voltage of the ith battery, SOCmin and
SOCmax represents the minimum and maximum SOC limits
of EVs, SOCcr is the current SOC of the EV battery and i
varies from 1 to n, where n = 100. In order to achieve better
control and coordination of EVs arrived in the CS; a control
algorithm is developed inside the battery system design. The
details of the control algorithm and its equations is explained
in the following section.
V. P ROBLEM D EFINITION
A. Design of charging station
The detailed control structure of the CS integrated with
the grid system is shown in Fig. 3. The CS has 100 EVs,
which represents multiple EVs connected in the CS, which is
represented as EV1 to EVn . The Qi and SOC levels of batteries
are taken to be different for representing bulk charging and
discharging of EVs. The CS is controlled externally by FLC
and an aggregator for distributing the power. The power of the
CS is controlled by controlling the Crate of EVs battery. The
control algorithm present in the EVs battery considers Vti , Qi ,
user
user defined SOC limits (SOClt ) and Crate limits (Crate
) based
on users preference. Depending on the SOC constraints of
the user, the discharge or charge energy of the EVs batteries
is controlled such that SOC limits at the end of the time
period remains between the range SOCmin and SOCmax . The
cr ) is given by the Eq. (??). The
current Crate of the battery (Crate
algorithm present inside the EVs battery choose the minimum
of the Crate .
Sb
cr
Crate
=

Vti Qi

(15)

where, Sbi is the power decided by the aggregator either to


charge or discharge the ith EV battery. The current flow in the
ith EV battery is given below.
cr
Ib i = QiCrate

(16)

Based on these criteria, the control algorithm calculates the


energy of the EVs battery.
Ebi = Vti Qi

(17)

Distribution Node
(DN)
P or Q or PQ
V1

maintained with its voltage limits. Five fuzzy subset such


as VL (Very Low), L (Low), M (Medium), H (High) and
VH (Very High) have been chosen for the input variable V1
and EbT . Seven membership function such as NH (Negative
High), NM (Negative Medium), NL (Negative Low), Z (Zero),
PL (Positive Low), PM (Positive Medium) and PH (Positive
High) have been chosen as output variable (SbT ). Triangular
membership functions are used as it is more simple, realizable
and easy to implement, which is shown in Fig. 4. Positive and
negative power values decides the power exchange between
the DN and the CS, respectively. Table I has the rules used
for the proposed controller.

Charging Station (CS)

control
PQ estimation

EbT

Eb1

Ebn

FLC

Qt

Eb1
Ebn

..
.

...

EV1
Battery

SOClt
SbT

Pbn

Pb1

user
Crate

user
Crate

EVn

SOClt

Battery

Qt

EbT

..
.

Aggregator

Sb1
Sbn

Fig. 3: Detailed layout of CS.

The total energy of the CS (EbT ) can be calculated as given


below.
n
i
i
EbT = Eavail
+ Ereq

TABLE I: Rule base


V1
VL
VL
VL
VL
VL
L
L
L
L
L
M
M
M

(18)

i=1

Fuzzy controller has been used in the V2G system to control


the power flow between the CS and the DN. The FLC receives
information such as V1 and EbT and it decides the SbT which
should flow between the DN and the CS. The rules of FLC
are formed based on the DN voltage variation and the energy
status of the battery. The derivation of fuzzy control rules is
heuristic in nature and the rules are derived using linguistic
variables. The rules are formed from the general knowledge
about the CS depending on the variations of V1 and EbT based
on the following four basic criteria:
If V1 and EbT lies in the range of (0.85 V1 0.99) and
(0.55 EbT 0.97), then SbT output lies between -1 to
-0.2, denotes V2G operation.
If V1 and EbT lies in the range of (1.01 V1 1.1) and
(0 EbT 0.5), then SbT output lies between 0.1 to 1,
denotes G2V operation.
If V1 and EbT lies in the range of (0.85 V1 0.99) and
(0 EbT 0.5), then SbT output will be zero, indicates
there cannot be any power transfer through the CS.
If V1 and EbT lies in the range of (1.01 V1 1.1)
and (0.55 EbT 0.97), then SbT output will be zero
indicates, there cannot be any power transfer through the
CS.
1

VL

VH

VL

0.5

0.75

VH

0.5
0

0.5
0
0.85

0.9125

(a)

0.975

1.0375

1.1

NH

0.25

(b)

V1 (p.u)
NM

NL

PL

EbT (p.u)

PM

PH

0.667

EbT
VL
L
M
H
VH
VL
L
M
H
VH
VL
L
M

SbT
Z
NL
NM
NH
NH
NL
NM
NM
NH
NH
PL
PL
PM

V1
M
M
H
H
H
H
H
VH
VH
VH
VH
VH
-

EbT
H
VH
VL
L
M
H
VH
VL
L
M
H
VH
-

SbT
NM
NH
PH
PM
PM
NM
NL
PH
PH
PM
NL
Z
-

B. Aggregator
An aggregator is used in V2G system to coordinate multiple
EVs. This is an intermediate system deals with multiple smallscale power of EVs, while providing the regulation service of
the grid on large-scale power. The aggregator designed in this
work obtains inputs both from FLC and EVs batteries, which
can be both positive and negative. The power output from FLC
(SbT ) reflects the present condition of the DN and decides
the magnitude and direction of power to be flown between
the CS and the grid. The energy output from EVs indicates
the individual (Eb1 , Eb2 ...Ebn ), and total energy status of EVs
(EbT ). Thus, EVs pertaining to the aggregator would charge
or discharge alternatively based on the command from the
grid operator and EV owner to meet the requested demand
of both the grid and EVs. The power division among the
batteries depends on (Eb1 , Eb2 ...Ebn ), EbT and SbT . Based on
this three inputs, it divides and distributes the power (Sbi )
among multiple EVs present in the CS as given below.

0.5
0
1

0.667

0.333

(d)

0.333

VI. R ESULT A NALYSIS

SbT (p.u)

Fig. 4: Membership functions for FLC (a) V1 (b) EbT and (c) SbT .

Thus, FLC has the ability to decide the power flow between the CS and DN, based on the present condition of
the DN and energy status of the EVs batteries. The excess
voltage rise or drop in the DN can be largely prevented,
if the CS can be operated in a controlled and coordinated
manner using FLC. Hence, the distribution network can be

The CS and its control algorithm described in Section IV,


V and VI have been evaluated by simulation. To investigate
the CS behavior, 100 EVs batteries have been taken for
representing the bulk charging or discharging of EVs. The total
size of CS studied in this work is 200kW. For simplification
of analysis, EVs batteries are grouped into 10 types and are
assumed to have same voltage ratings (250V) and different
SOCcr . The specifications of EVs batteries and the SOC
ratings are given in Table II.

70
95
85
65
75
65
55
85
90
85

10
15
25
15
20
20
25
15
20
25

3.0
2.5
3.5
2.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
4.0
3.0
3.5

The real time situations of EVs are examined by the


following three cases of EVs present at the CS.
EVs batteries with low SOC connected during off-peak
hours (0000hrs to 0600hrs and 2300hrs to 2400hrs).
EVs batteries with high SOC connected during peak
hours (0600hrs to 1100hrs and 1600hrs to 2200hrs).
EVs batteries with both high and low SOC connected
during normal hours (between 1200hrs to 1600hrs and
2200hrs to 2300hrs).
G2V operation is tested with EVs batteries of low SOC
during off-peak hours, when DN voltage is generally high
(1.01p.u to 1.1 p.u) and V2G operation is tested during peak
hours with high SOC batteries, when DN voltage is generally
low (below 0.98 p.u). While, the combined G2V and V2G
operation is tested during normal hours with EVs of high
and low SOC batteries. A total of +178.6kW of power is
considered for charging the EVs batteries (G2V), -158.2kW
of power is considered for discharging the EVs batteries
(V2G) and -120.8kW of power is considered during G2V and
V2G operation. In order to show the dynamics of the system,
the simulation results of node voltage is shown for 5 seconds
and the remaining graphs of battery energy and power has
been shown for 1 hour. To avoid the repetition of graphs only
10 sets of EVs batteries results are shown throughout the
section.
Node voltage V (p.u)

1.09 p.u

bT

= 178.6

100
50
0

0.2

0.4
0.6
Time (Sec)

1.045 p.u
After G2V operation

0
50
100
SbT = 158.2

150
200

0.2

0.4
0.6
Time (Sec)

52.4

60
40

20

bT

10

5.13 10 = 51.3

SbT = Qcs = 5.13

0
0

0.2

0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (Hours)

= Qcs = 17.11
17.11 10 = 171.1

15

0.2

0.4
0.6
Time (Sec)

0.8

0.8

0.8

(a) G2V operation


150
144.7

140
130

107.8

bT

120
110
100

0.2

0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (Hours)

0
5

4.55 10 = 45.5

10
15.15 10 = 151.5

15
20

SbT = Qcs = 4.55

SbT = Qcs = 15.15


0

0.2

0.4
0.6
Time (Sec)

(b) V2G operation


0
50
SbT = 120.8

100
150

0.2

0.4
0.6
Time (Sec)

0.8

150
62.0
100

142.0

50
46.6

33.4
0

0.2

0.4
0.6
Time (Sec)

0.8

1.12 10 = 11.2

4.39 10 = 43.9

SbT = Qcs = 4.39


6

SbT = Qcs = 1.12

0.2

0.4
0.6
Time (Sec)

(c) Both G2V and V2G operation

Fig. 6: Total power decided by FLC, total energy availability of EVs


battery and total battery power for V2G, G2V and both G2V and V2G
operation.

total energy availability of EVs battery (EbT ) and total battery


power (Pcs Qcs ) for the three cases of EVs in the CS using
Pcs Qcs control. The PbT and EbT shown in the graph is the total
measured power and energy of 10 EVs batteries. Therefore,
the total battery power and energy for 100 EVs will be its
product of 10. As the system considered to be a lossless
system, the net power decided by the FLC is equal to the
net battery power of the CS.
10
Eb1

3.717

2.835

10

10
9.345

8.827

b2

6.617

b3

6.917

8.869

b4

6.431

1
Before V2G operation

0.93 p.u

0.95

0.5

0.5

15
10

Time (Sec)

Time (Sec)

14.012

Eb5

After G2V and V2G operation

10
13.15
5

0.5

20

1.03 p.u

0.5

18.29

Before G2V and V2G operation

0.95
0

b10

10

0.99 p.u

20

10

0.5

21.7

11

8.01
0

0.5

0.5

15
16.28

10

14.78

10
E

b8

30

15

15

5.6

1.05

0
20

10.561

5
0

Node voltage V (Vp.u)

8.01
0

5.4
0.5

0.5

bi

0.8

80

0.99 p.u

0.9
0

119.2

EbT

100

Battery energy E (kWh)

Befor G2V operation


1.06
1.04

After V2G operation

1.05

0.8

120

1.08

Node voltage V (p.u)

150

1.1

1.02

200

Battery power (kW)

20
15
25
20
15
20
25
15
20
25

Battery power (kW)

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

Battery power (kW)

user
Crate

Battery energy EbT (kWh)

V2G

Battery energy EbT (kWh)

G2V

Battery energy EbT (kWh)

SOCmin

bT

Eb1 -Eb10
Eb11 -Eb20
Eb21 -Eb30
Eb31 -Eb40
Eb41 -Eb50
Eb51 -Eb60
Eb61 -Eb70
Eb71 -Eb80
Eb81 -Eb90
Eb91 -Eb100

SOCmax

observed; initially the node voltage is 1.09p.u before drawing


power from the grid for G2V operation. After providing
power to the EVs, the node voltage got reduced. However,
due to Pcs Qcs control in the CS, the node voltage is still
maintained to 1.045p.u within the specified nominal voltage
of the distribution network. In case of V2G operation, the
node voltage is initially 0.93 p.u during peak hours and after
injecting power from EVs the voltage got raised to 0.99p.u.
While, for combined case of EVs with high and low SOC, the
node voltage is 0.99p.u initially and it got slightly increased
to 1.03p.u. This is because, EVs in the CS has charged from
the CS itself and therefore it could provide very less power
to support to the grid. Hence, there is no major rise in grid
voltage. Fig. 6 shows the total power decided by FLC (SbT ),
Apparant power S (kVA)

Energy
(kWh)
8
12
16
20
24
28
32
36
40
44

EVs

SOCcr

Apparant power SbT (kVA)

SOClt

Apparant power SbT (kVA)

TABLE II: Specifications of EVs batteries.

0.5

Time (Hours)

Time (Sec)

Fig. 7: EV battery energy for 10 sets of EVs batteries.


Fig. 5: comparison of node voltage before and after a) V2G, G2V
and both G2V and V2G operation.

Fig. 5 shows the comparison of node voltage before and


after performing G2V, V2G and both G2V and V2G operations. While compared to Qcs control, the DN voltage has
sufficient rise in voltage in all the three cases. It has been

Fig. 7 shows the energy curves for 10 sets of EVs batteries


with high and low value SOCs. It can be observed from these
figures, EVs arrive at the CS with low value has increase
in energy and EVs with high value of SOC has decrease
in energy. Fig. 8 shows the EVs battery power. The battery
power of individual EV is based on the aggregator command.

0.1

Pb1 = 1.037

0.5

0.3

1.5
0

0.5

0.5

1.5

b5

b6

0.5

0.5
Pb10 = 1.743

= 1.690
2
1

0
0

0.5

0.5

0.5

Pb8 = 1.616

0.5

0.5

b2

16

20

24

100

b5

12

b3

16

20

24

12

b6

20

24

SOC (%)
8

12

E SOC (%)
b4
16

20

24

12

16

20

24

16

20

24

12

16

20

24

16

20

24

50
Eb8 SOC (%)

Eb7SOC (%)

SOC (%)
8

100

50
E

16

0
100

SOC (%)
0

50
E

SOC (%)

50
E

0
0

12

16

20

24

12

SOC (%)

100

100

50

50

Eb9 SOC (%)


0

100

50

100

50
E

12

b10

12

16

20

24

SOC (%)
8

12

Time (hrs)

Fig. 9: SOC variation of the EVs batteries.

24 hour variation of the grid. The battery gets charged during


off-peak hours and supports the grid during peak hours by
discharging its energy to the grid.
1.03
1.02

Normal node volatge profile

Node voltage V1 (p.u)

1.01
With P Q control
cs cs

1
With Q control

0.99

cs

0.98
0.97
0.96
0.95

12
Time (hrs)

150
100

0
Pcs

P Q
cs cs

Qcs

P Q

control

control

control

control

control

control

cs

cs

cs cs

R EFERENCES

100

Eb1 SOC (%)


0

200

Time (Hours)

50

250

combined Pcs Qcs control injects Pcs as well as Qcs in controlled


manner by regulating the DN voltage.

100

300

Fig. 11: Power and energy injected from the battery to maintain the
node voltage.

V2G

G2V
50

369.0

Fig. 8: EV battery power for 10 sets of EVs batteries.

100

50

382.915

350

50

bi

b9

100

Pb7 = 1.268

3
P

0.5

= 1.183

150

387.45

400

158.2

= 2.333

= 3.7333

1.5
0

b4

Battery power P (kW)

3
0

0.5

Pb3 = 2.489

164.737

0.5
Pb2 = 2.289

0.2

0.4

171.647

Battery energy (kWh)

450

200

Battery power (kW)

The battery power is calculated based on the Crate of the


battery. It is clear from the figure, the battery power got
increased during charging and decreased while supporting the
power to the grid. Fig. 9 shows the DN voltage variation for

16

20

24

Fig. 10: Comparison of node voltage with Qcs and Pcs Qcs control.

Fig. 10 shows the 24 hours variation of node voltage profile


for the distribution system of Guwahati city with respect to Qcs
and Pcs Qcs control. It has been observed, Pcs Qcs control has
achieve better voltage stability than Qcs control.
Fig. 11 shows the magnitude of EVs power and energy
during V2G operation for achieving 1.01p.u node voltage.
It is clear from the figure that Pcs Qcs injection requires less
power and energy as compared to individual Pcs and Qcs
injection. Therefore, it is concluded from the Fig. 11 that the
combined Pcs Qcs control gives better performance as compared
to individual Pcs and Qcs compensation. This is because,

[1] Z. Darabi and M. Ferdowsi, Aggregated impact of plug-in hybrid


electric vehicles on electricity demand profile, IEEE Transactions on
Sustainable Energy, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 501 508, Oct. 2011.
[2] Y. Ma, T. Houghton, A. Cruden, and D. Infield, Modeling the benefits
of vehicle-to-grid technology to a power system, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 1012 1020, May 2012.
[3] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, and J. Driesen, The impact of charging
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 371 380, Feb. 2010.
[4] D. Wu, D. Aliprantis, and L. Ying, Load scheduling and dispatch for
aggregators of plug-in electric vehicles, IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 368 376, March 2012.
[5] Z. Yang, S. Yu, W. Lou, and C. Liu, Privacy-preserving communication
and precise reward architecture for V2G networks in smart grid, IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 697 706, Dec. 2011.
[6] G. Li and X.-P. Zhang, Modeling of plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
charging demand in probabilistic power flow calculations, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 492 499, March 2012.
[7] S. Han, S. Han, and K. Sezaki, Development of an optimal vehicle-togrid aggregator for frequency regulation, IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 65 72, June 2010.
[8] , Estimation of achievable power capacity from plug-in electric
vehicles for V2G frequency regulation: Case studies for market participation, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 632 641,
Dec. 2011.
[9] Y. Ota, H. Taniguchi, T. Nakajima, K. Liyanage, J. Baba, and
A. Yokoyama, Autonomous distributed V2G (vehicle-to-grid) satisfying
scheduled charging, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 1,
pp. 559 564, March 2012.
[10] E. Sortomme and M. El-Sharkawi, Optimal scheduling of vehicle-togrid energy and ancillary services, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid,
vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 351 359, March 2012.
[11] , Optimal charging strategies for unidirectional vehicle-to-grid,
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 131 138, March
2011.
[12] Y. He, B. Venkatesh, and L. Guan, Optimal scheduling for charging
and discharging of electric vehicles, IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid,
vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1095 1105, Sept. 2012.
[13] M. Singh, P. Kumar, and I. Kar, Implementation of vehicle to grid
infrastructure using fuzzy logic controller, IEEE Transactions on Smart
Grid, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 565577, March 2012.
[14] K. Thirugnanam, H. Saini, and P. Kumar, Mathematical modeling of liion battery for charge/discharge rate and capacity fading characteristics
using genetic algorithm approach, in Transportation Electrification
Conference and Expo (ITEC), 2012 IEEE, June 2012, pp. 16.