Grid Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Different

Scenarios for a Smart Low-Voltage Distribution Grid

L. Mihet-Popa, X. Han, H. Bindner
Department of Electrical Engineering
Technical University of Denmark
Roskilde, Denmark
lmih@elektro.dtu.dk

J. Pihl-Andersen
*
, J. Mehmedalic
**
SEAS-NVE
*
, Dansk Energi
**
Svinninge
*
, Copenhagen
**
, Denmark
jop@seas-nve.dk, jme@danskenergi.dk

AbstractThis paper presents the modeling, analysis and
simulation of a low-voltage distribution grid model based on the
real data designed for evaluation of a future smart grid. The
grid model is built measuring the distribution lines length and
considering the cable dimensions and lengths, the grid age, the
number of cabinets and customers and the load per customer.
The aim of the model is to design, implement and test the
proposed configuration and to investigate whether the low-
voltage distribution grid is prepared for the expected future
increase of PV penetration, heat pumps and electric cars. The
model is implemented in NEPLAN and DIgSILENT Power
Factory and different scenarios are developed and analyzed. A
time series simulation is conducted for a specific scenario with a
comparison between different voltage and load profiles along the
feeders.
Index TermsLow-Voltage Distribution Grid; NEPLAN;
DIgSILENT Power Factory; PV Penetration.
I. INTRODUCTION
One of the main goals in the Danish energy policy is to
increase the amount of renewable energy in the energy mix to
30% of the energy in 2025 [1]. Last year, the Danish
parliament approved an even more ambitious target: to have
renewable supply 35 % of the countrys total energy needs-not
just electricity but also heating and transportation-by 2020,
and an incredible 100 % by 2050 [2].
The increase in solar penetration will affect operation and
design of distribution systems [3]. More than that, due to
changes in the way electrical energy is produced and used,
distribution network operators must adapt to changing usage
patterns: the penetration of renewable energy will continue to
grow and electricity is expected to increasingly substitute
fossil fuel in areas such as transportation and building heating
[1-3].
Increased distribution generation is becoming more
important in the current power system. In the future it will rely
more on distribution energy resources and on smart-grids [4]-
[5]. In the future smart-grid distribution systems must be
flexible and to be able to import/export the power from/to the
grid, to control the active and reactive power flows and to
manage the storage of energy [4-9].
This paper presents the design and implementation of a
representative low-voltage distribution grid model, based on
real data for summer and detached houses, for evaluation of a
future smart-grid. The aim of the model is to design,
implement and test the proposed configuration and to
investigate whether the low-voltage distribution grid is
prepared for the expected future increase of PVs, heat pumps
and electric cars. The model was implemented in NEPLAN
and DIgSILENT Power Factory to study different scenarios. A
steady-state and a dynamic analysis of the models have also
been presented with a comparison between different voltage
profiles.
II. LOW-VOLTAGE GRID MODEL
The aim of this section is to design and build a representative
low-voltage grid for summer houses and detached houses.
The grid model contains many components, such as: PV
systems, EV systems, heat pumps and conventional loads and
will be designed and tested to find out whether the proposed
low-voltage distribution grid is prepared for the expected
future increase of PV penetration, heat pumps and electric
cars connected along the feeders.
A. Grid Model Setup and Database Building
Many representative areas have been looked through for low-
voltage feeders containing the two types of houses (summer
houses and detached ones). The length of the low-voltage
feeders is measured using a GIS (Geographical Information
System) map. The number of customers, number of cable
cabinets and the number of customers per cable cabinet for
each feeder are collected and the maximum load per customer
is calculated using the Velander correlation [16] which
assumes that the load along the feeders is normally
distributed. Then a grid model was constructed from the data
using a statistical percentile.
To build a database for the grid model the data from 334 low-
voltage feeders was mapped. The following parameters are
taken into consideration: cable dimensions and lengths, the
grids age, category, substation no., no. of customers, no. of
cabinets and the load per customer. The measured feeder
length for the 85 % was 500 m for detached houses and 730
m for summer houses. We consider only two types of cables
(with a cross-section of 150 mm
2
AL and 95 mm
2
AL)
because 240 AL and 50 AL cables represent a very small part
of the total cable length investigated.
Based on measurements a regression analysis could establish
a statistical correlation between the consumers annual energy
consumption and the maximum load of the grid caused by
their consumption. The feeders aggregate load was
calculated using the Velander correlation:
w w P + =
max
(1)
In which P
max
represents the maximum load (measured in
kW), w is the annual consumption (measured as MWh), and
are the Velander constants. We used the following values for
Velander constants: =0.29 and =2.09 for detached houses
and =0.32 and =3 for summer houses.
B. Grid Model Components
The grid model contains conventional residential loads
(houses), heat pumps (with 1 and 3 phases), electric cars (1
phase and 3 phases) and PV systems (1, 2 and 3 phases). In
the case of one phase appliances it is assumed that all the
devices are connected to the same phase. Similarly 2 phase
PV systems are assumed to be connected to the same 2
phases.
For PV systems 3 parameters were considered: rated voltage,
tap position of the 10/0.4 kV transformer and the number of
phases (1, 2 or 3). The position of the tap-changer normally
depends on the primary voltage level on the 10 kV side. If the
distribution transformer is located at the end of a long 10 kV
feeder, the tap-changer is used to normalize the voltage level
on the secondary side. In this study the tap changer position is
used to allow a larger voltage drop/rise in some of the
scenarios.
The connection of heat pumps and electric cars to the low-
voltage grid, along the different feeders, will cause a voltage
drop.
C. Scenarios Developed to Design and Test Grid Model
The grid model was designed, based on SEAS-NVEs supply
area and was analyzed and tested for various load scenarios
through connection of appliances such as heat pumps, EVs
and PV systems.
23 scenarios were developed using 2 different voltage limits,
+6%/-10% and +10%/-10%. The first limit is based on DEFU
recommendations no. 16/2001 [12]. These limits were used in
Denmark during a grace period after EU legislation changed
nominal voltage from 220 V to 230 V in order to allow for
older 220 V household appliances to be phased out. The
+10%/-10% limit is based on the latest version of DEFU
recommendation 16, which closely mirrors European norm
EN 50160 [13].
It is estimated that the worst case scenarios is a summer day
with low load (20 % of max.) with the PVs connected to the
grid.
In the first four scenarios it is investigated how many solar
cells can be connected to the grid along the feeder without to
exceed the voltage limits defined in [12] and [13], when the
PV systems have three-phases and 6 kW each with the
residential load at 20 % of the maximum load. In the next five
scenarios it is investigated what happens in the same
conditions when one phase and 4 kW and two phases and 6
kW PV systems are connected along the feeder. In the next
seven scenarios we investigated how many electric cars (3
phases EV of 11 kW and one phase EV of 3.7 kW each) can
be connected to the grid, when the residential load is at the
maximum load, without exceeding the lower voltage limit.
We have investigated in the last five scenarios the connection
of heat pumps (3 phases HP of 2.8 kW each and one phase
HP of 1.5 kW each), to the grid, evenly distributed along the
feeder, with the residential loads at maximum load. In one of
these last five scenarios we considered a mixed load case (the
worst case scenario) when heat pumps (one phase and three
phases) and electric cars are connected simultaneously on the
same distribution grid.

III. GRID MODEL IMPLEMENTATION
Based on investigations, calculations and assumptions
presented in the last section a grid model for implementation
of all 23 scenarios has been designed. The model contains an
external grid, a distribution substation with a medium voltage
transformer (10/0.4 kV) and with ten cabinets (switch boards)
at which PV panels, residential loads, EVs and heat pumps
are connected.
The grid model was implemented in two different tools,
NEPLAN and DIgSILENT Power Factory, to study load
flow, steady-state voltage stability and dynamic and transient
behavior of the power system. These tools have been selected
as they have the ability to simulate load flow and RMS
fluctuations in the same software environment [14, 15].
In Fig. 1 is presented the implementation of the grid model
for a low-voltage distribution system in NEPLAN (a) and
DIgSILENT Power Factory (b).


a)


PowerFactory 14.1.6




Project:
Graphic: Grid10
Date: 1/21/2013
Annex:
Load Flow Balanced
Nodes
Line-Line Voltage, Magnitude [kV]
Voltage, Magnitude [p.u.]
Voltage, Angle [deg]
Branches
Active Power [kW]
Reactive Power [kvar]
Current, Magnitude [A]
SingleBusbar(5)/BB4 Ul=0,4..
u=1,13..
phiu=-..
SingleBusbar(11)/BB10
Ul=0,46500 kV
u=1,16251 p.u.
phiu=-146,17348 deg
SingleBusbar(10)/BB9
Ul=0,4..
u=1,16..
phiu=-..
SingleBusbar(9)/BB8
Ul=0,4..
u=1,15..
phiu=-..
SingleBusbar(8)/BB7
Ul=0,46220 kV
u=1,15549 p.u.
phiu=-146,24109 deg
SingleBusbar(7)/BB6
Ul=0,4..
u=1,14..
phiu=-..
Ul=0,4..
u=1,14..
phiu=-..
SingleBusbar(4)/BB3 Ul=0,4..
u=1,13..
phiu=-..
SingleBusbar(3)/BB2 Ul=0,4..
u=1,13..
phiu=-..
SingleBusbar(2)/BB1 Ul=0,4..
u=1,06..
phiu=-..
Busbar(1)/BB_LV
Ul=0,40087 kV
u=1,00217 p.u.
phiu=-149,42033 deg
usbar/BB_HV
Ul=10,00000 kV
u=1,00000 p.u.
phiu=0,00000 deg
Line(1)
P=-58,..
Q=3,63..
I=79,3..
P=62,1..
Q=-2,3..
I=79,3..
Line
P=-47,..
Q=5,06..
I=68,7..
P=50,4..
Q=-4,1..
I=68,7..
PV10
P=0,00..
Q=0,00..
I=0,00..
PV9
P=-23,..
Q=-0,0..
I=29,7..
PV8
P=-23,..
Q=-0,0..
I=29,8..
Static Ge..
P=0,00..
Q=0,00..
I=0,00..
PV7
P=-23,..
Q=-0,0..
I=29,9..
Static Ge..
P=0,00..
Q=0,00..
I=0,00..
Low-Volta..
P=1,71..
Q=-0,4..
I=2,19..
Line(9)
P=-4,3..
Q=-0,4..
I=5,46.. P=4,3793 kW
Q=0,4664 kvar
I=5,4681 A
Static Ge..
P=6,02..
Q=0,01..
I=7,48..
Static Ge..
P=0,00..
Q=0,00..
I=0,00..
Low-Volta..
P=1,45..
Q=-0,3..
I=1,85..
Line(8)
P=-26,..
Q=-0,8..
I=33,5..
P=27,0..
Q=0,87..
I=33,5..
Low-Volta..
P=1,45..
Q=0,36..
I=1,86..
Line(7)
P=-49,..
Q=-0,5..
I=61,7..
P=49,6..
Q=0,54..
I=61,7..
Low-Volta..
P=1,37..
Q=0,34..
I=1,76..
Line(6)
P=-71,..
Q=-0,1..
I=90,1..
P=72,1..
Q=0,19..
I=90,1..
Static Ge..
P=0,00..
Q=0,00..
I=0,00..
Low-Volta..
P=2,73..
Q=0,68..
I=3,53..
Line(5)
P=-68,..
Q=0,66..
I=86,7..
P=69,0..
Q=-0,5..
I=86,7..
Static Ge..
P=0,00..
Q=0,00..
I=0,00..
Low-Volta..
P=1,45..
Q=0,36..
I=1,89..
Line(4)
P=-66,..
Q=1,10..
I=84,8..
67,2..
1,0..
4,8..
Static Ge..
P=0,00..
Q=0,00..
I=0,00..
Low-Volta..
P=1,45..
Q=0,36..
I=1,90..
Line(3)
P=-65,..
Q=1,54..
I=83,0..
P=65,5..
Q=-1,4..
I=83,0..
Low-Volta..
P=1,45..
Q=0,36..
I=1,91..
PV1(..
P=6,01..
Q=0,00..
I=7,67..
Line(2)
P=-63,..
Q=1,98..
I=81,1..
P=63,8..
Q=-1,9..
I=81,1..
Low-Volta..
P=1,45..
Q=0,36..
I=1,91..
PV2
P=-6,0..
Q=-0,0..
I=7,67..
Low-Volta..
P=1,82..
Q=0,45..
I=2,55..
PV1
P=-6,0..
Q=-0,0..
I=8,16..
External Grid
P=-47,3023 kW
Q=5,5354 kvar
cosphi=-0,9932
T
rafo 10/0.4
P=-47,..
Q=5,53..
I=2,74..
P=47,4..
Q=-5,0..
I=68,7..
D
Ig
S
IL
E
N
T

b)
Fig. 1. Comparison between a) NEPLAN and b) DIgSILENT Power Factory
implementation for the designed distribution grid.

All components of the single line diagram, presented in Fig.
1, are built with standard blocks from the library.
The blue square above the cable cabinet (Fig. 1a) shows the
voltage on each phase, while the green squares show the
power and current for each phase. Also, the arrows show that
the components are active.
In DIgSILENT Power Factory implementation (Fig. 1b)
the squares above the bus-bars contain the parameters of the
cables and below the bus-bars show the voltages of each
phase. Also, each component of the cabinet, such as PV
systems, heat pumps and EVs has its own square block able to
show internal parameters (current, power, power factor).
Fig. 1 shows a power flow calculation for scenario no. 4,
where it was investigated how many PV systems (3 phase 6
kW each and U
n
10 %) could be connected to the distribution
grid, with a residential load at 20 % of maximum load. In this
case the voltage increase may not exceed 440 V in the most
remote cable cabinet. We have connected 4 PV systems at
each cabinets of the feeder (40 PV systems in total), and a
maximum voltage (438 V) was observed.
A power flow calculation for the scenario 10 is presented
in Fig. 2. In this case it was investigated how many electric
cars can be connected to the grid before voltage decreases
below the minimum limit (U
n
-10 %). In this scenario, six
electric cars (11 kW & 3 phase each) were distributed over
the five most remote cable cabinets, two electric cars in the
last remote cable cabinet and one electric car in each of the
next four cable cabinets. A minimum voltage of 359 V was
observed.
The residential load in this case is regulated to the
maximum with the 10 kV stable voltage on the primary side
of the substation with a conversion factor of 25.


Fig. 2. Power flow calculation for scenario 10 using DIgSILENT Power
Factory.

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
A. Steady-State Analysis
In this section a time series simulation is conducted using
DIgSILENT Power Factory. To investigate the characteristics
of the new components: PVs, EVs and HPs, we used the same
grid model proposed in the last section.
The daily time series in Fig. 3 (i.e. external grid voltage
profile, PV production, EV charging consumption, and the
detached house consumption) are the inputs of the simulation
model. The data with voltage profile (the dash curve in Fig.
4) and PV production curve (06:00 20:00) is collected on
15-05-2012 from a laboratory with real components and
renewable energy production (SYSLAB), at the Technical
University of Denmark-Ris campus. The capacities of PVs
are adopted to 6 kW. EV charging profile, from (1822), is
calculated based on the driving pattern [17] with the rated
charging power of 11 kW. The load profiles are calculated by
the load pattern, from the aggregated historical data in
Denmark, multiplying the peak power using the Velander
equation (1). By subtracting the production or adding the
consumption new household load profile can be obtained.
The time sweep load flow is executed by using DIgSILENT
programming language DPL.
Fig. 3 shows that at 19:00, the modified load has a peak
due to the EV charging (Scenario 10). However, considering
the deviation of human behaviors (smoothing effect), the over
all peak may be less than the sum of them. At 15:00, the
reversed load reach the peak where there is the largest
mismatch between load and PV production (Scenario 2). A
voltage rise can also be observed.
Fig. 4 shows the simulation results for one day with a
comparison between voltage profiles in the last node versus
voltage profile of the external grid. Using this approach (i.e.,
generate the profiles outside the power system software and
use its traditional function) the complexity of the models can
be avoided, but introducing a lot of manual work on
modifying the inputs.
P=-113.996
Q=-12.005
cosphi=-0.995
P=-31.037
Q=-2.257
cosphi=-0.997
P=106.732
Q=10.187
cosphi=-0.995
P=-105.883
Q=-9.909
cosphi=-0.996
P=87.630
Q=8.096
cosphi=-0.996
P=-86.736
Q=-7.900
cosphi=-0.996
P=68.498
Q=6.091
cosphi=-0.996
P=-67.940
Q=-5.969
cosphi=-0.996
P=49.693
Q=4.158
cosphi=-0.997
P=-49.394
Q=-4.093
cosphi=-0.997
P=31.155
Q=2.283
cosphi=-0.997
Ul=0.375
u=0.938
phiu=-152.260
Ul=0.372
u=0.930
phiu=-152.366
Ul=0.368
u=0.921
phiu=-152.440
Ul=0.365
u=0.913
phiu=-152.500
Ul=0.363
u=0.908
phiu=-152.547
Ul=0.362
u=0.904
phiu=-152.578
T10/0.4
LB1
L12
L23
L34
L45
L56
L67
L78
L89
L910
Skab10 Skab9
Skab8
Skab7 Skab6
Skab5
Skab4
Skab3
Skab2
Skab1
D04
D10
Ext.
P=-122.227
Q=-14.140
cosphi=-0.993
P=-151.098
Q=-21.773
cosphi=-0.990
P=140.459
Q=18.989
cosphi=-0.991
P=-139.082
Q=-18.539
cosphi=-0.991
P=123.326
Q=14.499
cosphi=-0.993
P=-151.098
Q=-21.773
cosphi=-0.990
P=-149.535
Q=-21.262
cosphi=-0.990
P=131.824
Q=16.721
cosphi=-0.992
P=-130.589
Q=-16.318
cosphi=-0.992
P=114.96
Q=12.322
cosphi=-0.994
P
=
-1
2
2
.2
2
7

Q
=
-1
4
.1
4
0

c
o
s
p
h
i=
-0
.9
9
3

Ul=0.394
u=0.984
phiu=-151.727
Ul=0.390
u=0.974
phiu=-151.834
Ul=0.386
u=0.964
phiu=-151.941
Ul=0.382
u=0.955
phiu=-152.048
Ul=0.378
u=0.946
phiu=-152.154 U
l=
1
0
.0
0
0
u
=
1
.0
0
0

p
h
iu
=
-0
.0
0
0


Fig. 3. Time series implementation of the load profiles for residential
load (based on Velander correlation (1)), EV load and PV load (distinguished
from the conventional load with a peak power multiplication factor) based on
the load pattern from the aggregated historical data in Denmark.


Fig. 4. a) Comparison between voltage profile of the external grid and
the voltage profiles of the PVs, EVs, base loads and all loads connected at
the last cabinet to the end of the feeders.

Time series simulation provides an overview of the
potential problems (thermal loading and voltage rise in our
case). Based on this the concurrency of a group of units can
be investigated towards less conservative design.

B. Time-series Simulations using Dynamic Models
The dynamic model of the PV System (PV panels and PV
inverter) has been built with standard block components from
the Power Factory library and also using the dynamic
simulation language (DSL). It is based on a single diode
equivalent electrical circuit for the PV model, described by an
exponential equation [9-11]. The model uses the cell
irradiation G
cell
and cell temperature T
cell
as inputs, measured
from a weather station and implemented as look-up tables, as
it is shown in the first two graphs of Fig. 5 a).
The PV panels are mounted in three strings: two of them
having 18 panels of 165 W each, and the 3
rd
one having 12
panels of 100 W [9]. The strings of panels are connected to the
low-voltage distribution network through a three-phase PV
inverter. More details can be found in [9]-[10].
The simulation model was validated using experiments
carried out using RISOE experimental facility-SYSLAB ([9]-
[11]).
The dynamic load model is implemented using a voltage
dependency of active power and it is described by ([14], [18]):

( )

=
) (
0
2 1
) (
0
2
) (
0
1 0
3 2 1
1
p p p
V
V
kp kp
V
V
kp
V
V
kp P P (2)

Where P
0
and V
0
are the initial values of power and
voltage, p
1
to p
3
are coefficients that define the proportion of
each component and kp are coefficients that reflect the
dependency of load (kp
1
=100%, kp
2
=0). Typically, in dynamic
simulation, a simplification is done and all loads are consider
to be constant admittance type (p
1
=2, p
2
=p
3
=0).
In Fig. 5 are presented the time-series simulation results,
with PV systems and loads connected together to the same
bus-bar, for 6 days in November 2012. The input data for the
simulation model (irradiation and temperature) was measured
from the weather station placed on Ris campus with a
sampling time of 1 second. The load profile was defined by
(2) with the voltage dependency of the active power.
Fig. 5 a) shows a comparison between input data (T
cell

between -4 and +6
0
C and G
cell
around 300 W/m
2
during the
day) and the output parameters of the model [output power of
the panels-P
dc1
+P
dc2
(P
dc
_
total
=2.7 kW) and output power of
the inverter-P
ac
=2.6 kW).
In Fig. 5 b) are shown the simulation results when 3 PV
inverters are connected together with the loads at the last 3
cabinets of the grid model presented in Fig. 1. In this
particular case, EVs and HPs are assumed to be an unknown
proportion of the total load and the PV systems have the same
parameters but the panels have a different orientation and tilt
angles.

1.44E+2 1.15E+2 8.64E+1 5.76E+1 2.88E+1 -2.78E-5 [h]
2,9077
2,2943
1,6809
1,0675
0,4541
-0,1593
PV_Inverter_block: Pac (kW)
PV_Inverter_block: Pdc (kW)
1.44E+2 1.15E+2 8.64E+1 5.76E+1 2.88E+1 -2.78E-5 [h]
9,00
6,00
3,00
0,00
-3,00
-6,00
PV_3b_MeasFile: Tcell (C)
1.44E+2 1.15E+2 8.64E+1 5.76E+1 2.88E+1 -2.78E-5 [h]
0,40
0,30
0,20
0,10
0,00
-0,10
PV_3b_MeasFile: Gcell (p.u.)

Subplot/Diagramm

Date: 8/15/2013
Annex: /2
D
Ig
S
IL
E
N
T

a)
1.4E+2 1.2E+2 8.6E+1 5.8E+1 2.9E+1 -2.8E-5 [h]
2,820
2,225
1,630
1,035
0,440
-0,155
PV_Inverter_block(1): Pac1 (kW)
PV_Inverter_block: Pac3 (kW)
PV_Inverter_block(2): Pac2 (kW)
1.4E+2 1.2E+2 8.6E+1 5.8E+1 2.9E+1 -2.8E-5 [h]
20,00
15,00
10,00
5,00
0,00
-5,00
Load_file2: Pload (kW)
1.4E+2 1.2E+2 8.6E+1 5.8E+1 2.9E+1 -2.8E-5 [h]
2,419
1,909
1,398
0,888
0,378
-0,133
PV_Inverter_block: Pdc1(kW)
PV_Inverter_block: Pdc2(kW)
PV_Inverter_block(1): Pdc3(kW)
PV_Inverter_block(1): Pdc4(kW)
PV_Inverter_block(2): Pdc5(kW)
PV_Inverter_block(2): Pdc6(kW)

Subplot/Diagramm(1)

Date: 8/16/2013
Annex: /3
D
Ig
S
IL
E
N
T

b)
Fig. 5. a) Time series simulation results of the PV system for 6 days with real
data implemented as input and with DC and AC powers as outputs; b)
Comparison between IN and OUT of the 3 PV inverters, connected to the last
3 cabinets of the grid model together with a dynamic load defined by (2).

CONCLUSION
In this paper we have proposed a representative low-voltage
grid for summer and detached houses based on real data
measurements. The feeder lengths were measured using GIS
maps. The number of customers, cable cabinets and of
customers per cable cabinet were collected and the maximum
load per customer has been calculated using the Velander
correlation.
The grid model contains many components, such as: PV
systems, EVs, heat pumps and residential loads and was
designed and tested, based on 23 scenarios, to find out
whether the proposed distribution grid model is prepared for
the expected future increase of PV penetration with heat
pumps and electric cars connected along the feeders. The
developed scenarios clearly have shown that there is room for
larger loads if the output voltage from the substation can be
optimally set and/or varies according to the type and the size
of the load. Also, in a weak distribution line with a high
output voltage only 3 phase PV systems should be installed,
as 1 phase PVs under the same conditions are more likely to
exceed the voltage limits.
The low-voltage distribution grid model has been
developed and implemented in NEPLAN and DIgSILENT
Power Factory to study load flow, steady-state voltage
stability and dynamic behavior of the components. The
comparison between both simulation tools has shown a good
alignment and the possibility to use them for further
developments, regarding the integration of smart-grid
technologies. It means that this work could be used for
development and improvements of the models for different
components placed along the feeders in a future smart-grid
distribution network.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported in part by the E.U. Project-Smart
Plan, No. 55807/2011-2013.

REFERENCES
[1] "Smart Grid i Danmark", joint report by energinet.dk and Dansk
Energi, September 2010.
[2] J. Kumagai, The Smartest, Greenest Grid-What a little Danish island
is showing the world about the future of energy, IEEE Spectrum, May
2013, pp. 38-43.
[3] Y. Riffonneau, S. Bacha, S. Barruel and S. Ploix, Optimal power
management for grid connected PV systems with batteries, IEEE
Transaction on Sustainable Energy, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 309-320, July
2011.
[4] H. Jiayi, J. Chuanwen, and X. Rong, A review on distributed energy
resources and MicroGrid, ELSEVIER Renewable & Sustainable
Energy Reviews, vol. 12, pp. 2472-2483, 2008.
[5] Smart Grid: Reinventing the electric power system, IEEE Power &
Energy Magazine, March 2012.
[6] P.C. Loh, L. Zhang and F. Gao, Compact integrated energy systems
for distributed generations, IEEE Transactions on Industry
Electronics, Vol. 5, May 2012.
[7] M. Jansen, R. Louie, M. E. Amoli and F. Sami, Model and simulation
of a 75 kW PV solar array, in Proc. of 2010 IEEE PES Transmission
and Distribution Conference and Exposition, pp. 1-5.
[8] H. Liu, L. Jin, D. Le and A. A. Chowdhury, Impact of high
penetration of solar photovoltaic generation on power system small
signal stability, in Proc. of 2010 POWERCON, pp. 1-7.
[9] C. Koch-Ciobotaru., L. Mihet-Popa, F. Isleifsson and H. Bindner,
Simulation model developed for a small-scale PV-System in a
distribution network, in Proc. of the 7th IEEE SACI Conf., 2012,
Timisoara-Romania, May 24-26, pp. 257-261.
[10] L. Mihet-Popa, C. Koch-Ciobotaru, F. Isleifsson and H. Bindner,
Development of tools for DER Components in a distribution
network, in Proc. of ICEM Conf., September 2-5, 2012, Marseille-
France, pp. 1022-1031.
[11] Y. Zong, L. Mihet-Popa, D. Kullman, A. Thavlov, O. Gehrke and H.
Bindner, Model Predictive Controller for Active Demand Side
Management with PV Self-Consumption in an Intelligent Building,
IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe, Berlin-
Germany, October 14-17.
[12] DEFU recommendations no. 16/2010.
[13] European Standard-EN 50160.
[14] DIgSILENT PowerFactory, Digsilent gmbh, November 2012.
[15] NEPLAN, Tutorial manual, 2011.
[16] M. Velander, Methods of operational analysis applied to distribution
of electric power, Journal of Teknisk Tidskrift, Vol. 82, 1952, pp. 293-
299.
[17] [Online].Available:
http://www.scb.se/Pages/Product____10616.aspx?Produktkod=TK1101
&displaypublications=true;
[18] P. Kundur, Power system stability and control, McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1994.