Vars versus Watts from Distributed Energy Resources.

Nokhum Markushevich
Smart Grid Operations Consulting

The “Volt / var with var priority” function is considered as one of the functions of the Smart Distribution
Grid [1]. The primary objective of this function is to support voltage quality and/or var requirements by
providing more reactive power from the distributed energy resources (DER) at the expense of real
power injections by the DERs.

The available reactive power from an inverter depends on its rated power factor, actual kW, and voltage
at the terminals of the inverter. For each fixed value of the DER real power, the available reactive power
of the DER is presented in Table 1 for the voltage equal 1pu, and in Table 2 for the voltage equal 0.95pu.
The rated real power is assumed 100%, and the reactive power is presented in the same scale. As seen
in the tables, even with PF=1, there is available reactive power, when the real power is below 100%.
The choice of the rated PF should be based on a benefit/cost study of the distribution system with
inverters during system planning and/or during the process of the interconnection studies.

Table 1. Var capabilities of inverter (without kW reduction). Rated kW = 100%, DER Volt=1

DER kW, Rated Power Factor of the inverter

% 1 0.95 0.9 0.85
100 0 33 48 62
90 44 55 65 76
80 60 68 77 86
70 71 79 86 95
60 80 86 94 101
50 87 93 99 106
40 92 97 104 111
30 95 101 107 114
20 98 103 109 116
10 99 105 111 117
0 100 105 111 118

Table 1.

The same reduction of kW, but from different initial kW of the DER, does not provide the same
additionally available kvars, as seen in Table 3.
Table 2 presents the case when the voltage at the DER terminals is 0.95 pu. As seen in this table, the
available kvars are less than in Table 1.

The same reduction of kW, but from different initial kW of the DER, does not provide the same
additionally available kvars, as seen in Table 3.

Table 2. Var capabilities of inverter (without kW reduction). Rated kW = 100%, DER Volt=.95

DER kW, Rated Power Factor

% 1 0.95 0.9 0.85
100 0 0 34 50
90 32 44 55 66
80 54 60 69 78
70 68 71 79 87
60 78 80 87 94
50 85 87 93 100
40 91 92 98 104
30 95 95 101 108
20 98 98 104 110
10 99 99 105 111
0 100 100 106 112

Table 3 presents the additional kvars that become available after the kW are reduced by 10%, For
instance, when the PF=0.90 and the voltage is 0.95pu, reduction of the kWs by 10% from the initial
100% provide 21.4 % of additional kvars. Reduction of the kWs by 10% from the initial 90% of kWs
provides 13.7 % of additional kvars. As seen in the table, the lower is the initial DER kW, the smaller are
the additionally available kvars.

Table 3. Additional kvars available due to reduction of DER kW by 10% from different initial DER kWs,
%. DER Volt =0.95pu

Initial Rated Power Factor

kW, % 1 0.95 0.9 0.85
100 32.0 43.6 21.4 16.4
90 21.9 16.4 13.7 11.8
80 13.7 11.4 10.1 9.1
70 9.9 8.6 7.8 7.2
60 7.5 6.6 6.1 5.7
50 5.7 5.0 4.7 4.4
40 4.2 3.7 3.5 3.3
30 2.9 2.6 2.4 2.3
20 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.4
10 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4
If the additional reactive power is needed to raise the voltages in some voltage-critical points, the
impacts of both the reduction of the DER real power and the increase of the DER reactive power should
be compared. The following conditions should be met:

Δkvar(DERk) x Reactance(k-l)+ ∆kW(DERk) x Resistance(k-l) > 0 (1)

Volti,min ≤Volti ≤ Volti,max (2)

Ampj ≤ Ampj,max (3)

(Operating kW Reserve) ≥ (Operating kW Reserve)min , (4)

Where

k – is the k-th DER involved in the kw-kvar exchange

k-l - is the electrical path either between the l-th critical point and source of supply, or between the k-th
DER and source of supply, depending on the mutual allocation of the critical point and DER

i – is the i-th node in the subject network

j – is the j-th element in the subject network

min – is the minimum limit

max – is the maximum limit

As follows from (1)

∆kvark / ∆kWk > resistance(k-l) / reactance(k-l) (5)

Table 4 presents the ∆kvar / ∆kW ratios for different initial DER kWs. As seen in the table, if the
resistance to reactance ratio is 1, all cases in
Table 4 represented in italics would not provide voltage increase in the sought points due to the
additional available kvars. If the resistance to reactance ratio were 1/2, no cases in

Table 4 represented in bold numbers would provide voltage increase, and if the resistance to reactance
ratio were 1/3, no cases in

Table 4 represented in red would provide voltage increase.

Table 4. Ratios of the increase of DER kvars over reduction of kW from the initial kWs. DER Volt
=0.95pu.

Initial Rated Power Factor

kW, %
1 0.95 0.9 0.85
100 3.2 4.4 2.1 1.6
90 2.2 1.6 1.4 1.2
80 1.4 1.1 1.0 0.9
70 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7
60 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6
50 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4
40 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3
30 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2
20 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1
10 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
There is another function of the Smart Distribution Grid – the Volt-Watt function [1]. The main objective
of this function is reducing the overvoltage by reducing the kW of some DERs. When the DERs have the
capability of absorbing kvars, this function is similar to the Volt/var with var priority function. In this
case, reduction of DER’s kW releases additional available absorbing kvars. In many cases, the additional
absorbing kvars have a greater effect on voltage reduction, than the reduction of kW.

When the kWs and kvars of DERs are changed, the power flow in both the distribution and transmission
networks is also changed. This means that the losses, nodal voltages, loading of elements, operating
reserves, and other dependent parameters are changed. We can say that there are “cost” and “benefits”
of such changes. It is a challenge to adequately determine the cost/benefit relationship between the
reduced kWs and additional kvars in the near real time. To make such an assessment, an optimization
procedure based on comparative power flow simulations should be used.

Consider an example of the application of the “Volt/var with var priority” function. Figure 1 presents
the example diagram. The transmission equivalent represents a 115kV network. The distribution is a
12kV network. The sample operating conditions are such that the secondary voltages in nodes 1210 and
1209 are below the lower voltage limits. The voltage cannot be improved by changing the voltage at the
bus 1201. Hence, the Volt / var with var priority function is considered. Different cases of DER kW
reduction have been analyzed. The paths between the voltage critical points and the main source of
supplies do not include the DERs in nodes 1202, 1203, and 1204. That is why these DERs were not
considered in the analysis. A number of other combinations of reductions of DER kW for additional kvars
were considered (see Table 5). The effects of these combinations on the voltages in the critical nodes
are presented in As seen in Table 5, Case 1 represents the initial conditions, when the voltage in node
1210 is 92%, and in node 1209 it is 94.1% (see Table 6). Cases 2 through 6 represent different degrees of
DER kW reduction in the most critical point – 1210. The reduction ranges from 10% through 100%. Even
with 100% of reduction of DER kW in the secondaries of the critical node, the voltage does not reach the
standard level (95%). Combinations 7 through 11 also do not provide the desired results. Combination
12, which involves all DERs located fully or partially on the paths between the critical points and the
source of supply, brings the voltages in the critical points into the standard range.

Let us consider the “cost” of such improvement of the voltage quality. As seen in Table 6, the real power
losses in the distribution network increased by 47%, and the losses on the transmission network
increased by 4%.

Table 6.
 100 Transmission Equivalent 101
G 150 G

SVC CAP

G 1201
1204 1203 1202
A B C
G

C2
G

G
1210 1208 1206 1207 G
12051
PCC i
G C1
C3 G Microgrid

G
1209 1211

Figure 1. Diagram of the example circuits

Table 5. Different cases of reduction of the DER’s kWs (%) for additional kvars

1209 1210
DER in Node: 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1211
Critical Point 2 Critical Point 1
Case 1-Initial 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Case 2 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 100
Case 3 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 80 100
Case 4 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 70 100
Case 5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 50 100
Case 6 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0 100
Case 7 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 90 100
Case 8 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 80 100
Case 9 100 100 100 100 100 100 80 80 100
Case 10 100 100 100 100 90 100 100 70 100
Case 11 100 100 100 100 80 100 100 70 100
Case 12 100 100 100 70 70 70 90 50 70
Case 13 100 100 100 80 100 100 90 50 70
As seen in Table 5, Case 1 represents the initial conditions, when the voltage in node 1210 is 92%, and in
node 1209 it is 94.1% (see Table 6). Cases 2 through 6 represent different degrees of DER kW reduction
in the most critical point – 1210. The reduction ranges from 10% through 100%. Even with 100% of
reduction of DER kW in the secondaries of the critical node, the voltage does not reach the standard
level (95%). Combinations 7 through 11 also do not provide the desired results. Combination 12, which
involves all DERs located fully or partially on the paths between the critical points and the source of
supply, brings the voltages in the critical points into the standard range.

Let us consider the “cost” of such improvement of the voltage quality. As seen in Table 6, the real power
losses in the distribution network increased by 47%, and the losses on the transmission network
increased by 4%.

Table 6. Effects of kW reduction for additional kvars

Case
1
Parameter 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Initial
MinVolt 1
Node 92.0% 93.2% 93.6% 93.8% 93.9% 93.4% 93.3% 93.7% 93.7% 94.3% 94.5% 95.4% 95.1%
1210
MinVolt 2
Node 94.1% 94.5% 94.6% 94.7% 94.7% 94.4% 94.9% 95.1% 95.2% 95.3% 95.4% 96.6% 96.2%
1209
DistLoss 100.0 100.4 102.3 106.7 118.6 100.1 100.3 101.5 104.4 147.2 109.3
99.2% 98.8%
% % % % % % % % % % %
TrLoss 100.0 100.0 100.1 100.3 100.6 101.4 100.0 100.1 100.2 100.5 100.9 104.1 101.1
% % % % % % % % % % % % %

Changes of other parameters are presented in Table 7. As seen in the table, the kW flowing into the
distribution system from the transmission system increased by 51%, while the kvars were flowing into
the transmission system from the distribution network. The natural real load in distribution increased by
2.7% and the reactive load increased by 8.1% due to the increase in the weighted average secondary
voltages by 2.7%. The total DER’s kW reduction was 29%, while the DER’s kvars increased four times.
The loading of the transmission line feeding the subject substation increased by 3%.

Table 7. Additional factors affected by the reduction of DER’s kW for more kvars

Parameter Initial Case Final Case Relative change, pu Relative change

for case 13, pu
DistkW 4586 6933 1.51 1.16
Distkvar 2178 -836 -0.38 0.49
DistLoadP 10773 11070 1.027 1.013
DistrLoadQ 5786 6254 1.081 1.034
TotDERP 6500 4598 0.71 0.91
TotDERQ 1231 4917 3.99 1.92
TRAmp 349 360 1.03 1.01
AverVolt-Weighted 0.962 0.989 1.027 1.013
As follows from the above analyses, the many entities of different ownerships paid a significant “cost” to
improve the voltages in two distribution nodes.

The sample distribution circuit (for cases 1-12) was an overhead distribution system with the R/X ratio of
the involved primary circuits around 0.55. If the circuit were with a higher ratio (e.g., underground), the
effect would be much smaller, and the cost would be much higher. On the other hand, if the circuit
were of a smaller R/X ratio, then the effect would be greater, and the cost would be significantly
smaller. Such an example is presented in case 13. In this example, the R/X ratio is around 0.3.

As seen in case 13, the kW flowing into the distribution system from the transmission system increased
only by 16%, while the kvars were still flowing from the transmission system in the distribution network.
The natural real load in distribution increased by 1.3% and the reactive load increased by 3.4% due to
the increase in the weighted average secondary voltages by 1.3%. The total DER’s kW reduction was 9%,
while the DER’s kvars increased about two times. The loading of the transmission line feeding the
subject substation increased by 1%.

Consider another use of the Volt/var with var priority function. In this case, all DER owners
autonomously run the Conservation Voltage Reduction (CVR) mode of Volt/var control. In order to
reduce the voltage, they reduced the injection of vars in the circuit. Because of this, the voltages in the
entire circuit were reduced, and in one node, it was reduced below the standard voltage limits. The DER
in this voltage-critical point could not produce enough, if any, reactive power to support the needed
voltage at its bus. In order to provide the customers in this node with quality voltage, the distribution
system operator (DSO) or the DMS needs to increase the voltage at the bus of the main feeding
substation, increasing the voltages in the entire distribution network fed from this bus. In such a case,
reduction of the kW injection by the DER in the voltage-critical point to release its reactive power may
help in supporting the voltage in this point and, at the same time, avoid raising the substation voltage.

Consider an example. The sample circuit is the same as in the previous example with the R/X ratio about
0.55.

The results of the analysis are presented in Table 8 (cases 14 and 15).

Table 8. Results of the analysis of the CVR case.

Parameter Case 14: Case 15: Change Results of Case 16: Change
Substation kW of DER 1210 Between kW of DER 1210 between cases 16
Voltage is reduced by 50%. cases 15 and reduced by 50%. and 15
increased The voltage 14 All DER generate
to provide increase at the maximum available
standard substation bus is kvar.
voltage in smaller than in case Substation voltage is
node 1210 14 by 3% additionally reduced
by 3%
MinVolt, pu
0.95 0.95 0 0.95 0
Node 1210
DistLoss, kW 683 592 -91 340 -252
TrLoss, KW 6287 6198 5897 -301
-89
Distribution 5285 5357 71 5165 -193
inflow, kW
Distribution 7329 5980 -1350 1440 -4500
inflow, kvar
Distribution 11102 10965 -138 11025 55
real load, kW
Distribution
6407 6114 -293 6174 52
reactive load,
kvar
Total DER kW 6500 6200 -300 6200 0

Total DER kvar -1668 -700 968 2292 2953

Transmission 365.6 362.8 -2.8 352 -11

line Amps
Average
0.99 0.98 -0.01 0.985 0.005
Voltage-
Weighted

As seen in the table, the combined actions by the DSO and the DER owner in node 1210 (case 15) result
in 138 kW reduction of total customer loads, in 91 kW reduction of distribution losses, and in 89 kW
reduction in transmission losses. These reductions benefit all customers. However, the customer in node
1210 needs to take additional 300 kW from the grid to compensate for the reduction of its DER
injection. This additional cost to the customer 1210 can be considered as payment for the improved
voltage quality, or can be fully or partially compensated from the benefits of other customers. This
matter is beyond the scope of this paper.

Case 16 in Table 8 presents a case when the Volt/var function is coordinated by the DSO/DMS. In this
case, the objective of the function is still CVR, but the DSO requests providing maximum available kvars
from the DERs. The additional supply of vars from the DERs allows the DSO to reduce the substation bus
voltage by additional 3%. The difference between this case and the case of autonomous Volt/var
controls is presented in the last column of Table 8. As seen in the column, the distribution losses are
reduced by 252 kW, the transmission losses are reduced by 301 kW, and the total customer load is
increase by 55 kW. The overall conservation of kWs is 498 kW. Whether this case is beneficial for the
customers depends on the ratio of the cost of a consumed kW over the cost of a lost kW. In this example
with about ten-fold difference between the loss reduction and load increase (553/55), it is most likely
that the case is beneficial for all customers.

Conclusions

1. The efficiency of the Volt / var with var priority function in distribution with high penetration of
DER depends on a number of factors, such as:
 the dominant R/X ratio of the circuits,
  the mutual allocation of the voltage-critical points and the DERs,
 the sizes of the DERs,
 the rated Power Factors of the DERs,
 the initial loading of the DERs,
 the availability of the DERs to participate in the Volt / var with var priority function.
2. To take into account all the above factors and find the optimal solution, a comparative power
flow analysis should be performed, in other words, an optimization procedure should be
applied.
3. The cost of mitigating voltage violations in distribution by using the Volt / var with var priority
function in distribution circuits with the dominant R/X ratios above 0.5 may be very high. If such
conditions may happen often, an upgrade of the circuits may be a more efficient solution and
should be considered in the planning stage.
4. Coordination of the Volt/var control function by the DSO/DMS instead of autonomous controls
by the DER owners, following the same objective, may provide more benefits to all customers.

References and further reading

1. John Berdner, Advanced Inverters and Grid Support. Available: http://www.clean-

coalition.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Grid-support-With-Advanced-Inverters.pdf
2. Nokhum Markushevich and Alesandr Berman, “New Aspects of IVVO in Active Distribution
Networks”, Presented at IEEE PES 2012 T and D
3. Nokhum Markushevich, ‘What will the Microgrids and EPS Talk about?’ Part 1 and 2. Available:
http://www.energycentral.com/gridtandd/gridoperations/articles/2858 and
http://www.energycentral.com/gridtandd/gridoperations/articles/2864
4. Nokhum Markushevich and Edward Chan, Integrated Voltage, Var Control and Demand
Response in Distribution Systems, IEEE, March 2009, Seattle
5. N. Markushevich and A. Berman, Distribution Automation and Demand Response,
DistribuTech2008, Tampa, Fl, January, 2008; North American Policies and Technologies,
Electricity, Transmission & Distribution, 2008, Volume 20, No. 8 ; 2009, Volume 21, No. 1
http://www.electricity-today.com/download/issue8_2008.pdf; http://www.electricity-
today.com/download/issue1_2009.pdf
6. Nokhum Markushevich, Applications of Advanced Distribution Automation in the Smart Grid
Environment, T&D Online Magazine, January-February 2010 issue. Available:
http://www.myvirtualpaper.com/doc/Electric-Energy/january-february-2010/2010012802/#22
7. Development of Data and Information Exchange Model for Distributed Energy Resources, EPRI,
Palo Alto, CA: 2010. 1020832. Available:
http://www.epri.com/abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?ProductId=000000000001020832
&Mode=download
8. Coordination of Volt/var control in Connected Mode under Normal Operating Conditions.
Available: http://smartgrid.epri.com/Repository/Repository.aspx/
9. Update aggregated at PCC real and reactive load-to-voltage dependencies. Available:
http://smartgrid.epri.com/Repository/Repository.aspx/
10. Updates of capability curves of the microgrid’s DERs. Available:
http://smartgrid.epri.com/Repository/Repository.aspx/
11. Understanding Coordinated Voltage and Var Control in Distribution Systems: Is Power
Factor = 1 Always a Good Thing? Available:
http://www.energycentral.com/gridtandd/gridoperations/articles/1553/Understanding -
Coordinated-Voltage-and-Var-Control-in-Distribution-Systems-Is-Power-Factor-1-Always-a-
Good-Thing-