Voltage Control Scheme Using Fuzzy Logic

for Residential Area Networks with PV

Generators in Saudi Arabia
R. A. Shalwala, Student Member, IEEE, and J. A. M. Bleijs, Member, IEEE

Abstract--One of the most important operational requirements

for any electrical power network for both distribution and
transmission level is voltage control. Many studies have been
carried out to improve or develop new voltage control techniques
to facilitate safe connection of distributed generation. In Saudi
Arabia, due to environmental, economical and development
perspectives a wide integration of photovoltaic (PV) generation in
distribution network is expected in the near future. This
development in the network may cause voltage regulation
problems due to the interface with the existing conventional
control system. Therefore, a new control system with PVs should
be developed. This paper introduces a new voltage control
scheme for residential area networks in Saudi Arabia based on
Fuzzy Logic concept (FL). The structure of two implementations
of FL controller to regulate the voltage by setting the on-load tap
changing transformer is proposed. In order to confirm the
validity of the proposed methods, simulations are carried out for
a realistic distribution network with real data for load and solar
radiation. Results showing the performance of each
implementation are presented and discussed.
Index Terms-- Distribution System, ETAP, Fuzzy logic
controller, Grid Connected, MATLAB, Photovoltaic Systems,
Saudi Arabia, Solar radiation, Voltage control

I. INTRODUCTION
raditionally, the distribution network of the power system
is a passive network with a radial configuration.
Electricity flows one way from a substation to a large
distribution network. During normal operation or planning
period, a steady-state analysis of voltage regulation, system
losses, protection coordination, power quality, and system
reliability must be performed to ensure proper operation
within appropriate operating voltage range. Each utility has its
own operation and planning criteria depending on distribution
system characteristics and design criteria.
Currently, in Saudi Arabia, the exploitation of solar energy
as an alternative source of electric power is being considered
because of the abundant amount of irradiation and long hours
of sunshine. One way to achieve this is by using GridConnected
Photovoltaic systems (GCPV) on domestic dwellings directly
connected to the distribution network. This means that in the

This work was supported by the Ministry of High Education In Saudi

Arabia under Grant U208. The support of the Saudi Cultural Bureau in
London for sponsoring the fact-finding trip to Saudi Arabia to obtain the
required data is gratefully acknowledged.
R. A. Shalwala is with the Department of Engineering, University of
Leicester, Leicester, UK (e-mail: rs234@leicester.ac.uk).
J. A. M. Bleijs is with the Department of Engineering, University of
Leicester, Leicester, UK (e-mail: jamb1@leicester.ac.uk)

2010 IEEE

future the system performance will be affected by PV

generators. According to [1-3] distributed generation has both
advantages and disadvantages for the system.
In this paper two implementations of fuzzy logic technique
have been used to maintain the voltage in a residential area
network with high penetration of PV generators in Saudi
Arabia. The ETAP simulation package has been used for
power flow calculation and the MATLAB software package
has been used to design the fuzzy logic controller.
II. POWER FLOW CALCULATIONS
Generally, distribution utilities deliver electric energy to
their customers within an appropriate voltage range to meet
customer requirements. For a radial configuration the bus
voltage, voltage drop, power flow, and power loss can be
calculated by using a simplified model such as the two-bus
system as shown in Fig. 1 [4].
| |

1/

Bus#1

| |
12

Bus#2

Fig. 1. Model of a two-bus distribution system.

The model consists of a short distance line represented by a
series connection of resistance (R) and inductive reactance
(X). In this case, real and reactive power (
transfer
between bus #1 and bus #2 is described by (1) and (2).

Where:

cos

cos

(1)

sin

sin

(2)

is the voltage angle at bus #1

is the voltage angle at bus #2
is the admittance angle

Power loss between bus #1 and bus #2 is given by eq.(3):

(3)

| |

In addition, the voltage at bus #2 and the voltage drop

between theses buses can be calculated in terms of the voltage
at bus #1 by using (4) and (5), respectively.
(4)

(5)

In a typical distribution system there are many scenarios to

be considered, and to handle calculation in a large system,
power system simulation software is required. In this paper,
the power systems simulation package ETAP is used for
evaluating of steady-state performance under different load
and PV generation conditions.

TABLE I

III. SYSTEM MODELING

LINE PARAMETERS OF ISK11

The following model of a real distribution network in a

residential area will be used as a base case in this paper
(Fig.2). The distribution network starts from the Station bus at
110 kV, through a step-down 110/11 kV power transformer at
each primary substation (ISK11, RSF04, and ISK10)
connecting to 3 branches. Each branch includes a number of
secondary substations (labeled as I1, I2,I9, R1,....R7,S1....and
S9), connecting to a customer feeder through another stepdown11/0.38 kV transformer (see detail in Fig. 2).

From Bus

To Bus

Lenghth (m)

Impedance (/km)

ISK11

I1

1875

0.128+j0.1344

I1

I2

15

0.128+j0.1344

I2

I3

327

0.128+j0.1344

I3

I4

153

0.128+j0.1344

I4

I5

513

0.128+j0.1344

I5

I6

396

0.128+j0.1344

I6

I7

132

0.128+j0.1344

I7

I8

648

0.128+j0.1344

I8

I9

255

0.128+j0.1344

Fig. 3 shows the average daily load profile for this area
during each month. This area includes 5000 residential
properties.
Average Daily load for a residential Area
Jan

100.0
90.0

Peak Load

Feb
Mar

Laod (MW)

80.0

Apr

70.0

May

60.0

Jun

50.0

Average Load

Aug

40.0

Sep

30.0

Oct

20.0
10.0

Jul

Nov
Dec

Light Load

0.0

Average

8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (hour)

Fig. 3. Average daily load of a residential area.

Fig. 2. Test residential network with 3 branches

There are 6 load nodes tapped off from each feeder. Each
branch is equipped with on-load tap changing transformer
(LTCT) that has the ability of changing the voltage level of
the branch at the main substation bus in small steps (0.5% of
nominal voltages), adjusted by the automatic voltage
controller (AVC). The main branches can be interconnected
through normally-open circuit breakers in the case of outage
of one of the 110/11 kV transformers.
Since this study is concentrating on the effect of GCPV on
the voltage regulation in the network under normal operation
(no faults), the longest branch which is ISK11 will be the most
sensitive because it will have the largest variations for the
different load and irradiation scenarios. The line parameters of
this branch are shown in Table I.
A.

Load Conditions

Real load data for the selected residential area has been
collected from the Saudi Electricity Company in the Western
Region (SEC-WR) who has also provided details of the
transformers and lines of the network. Based on this
information a detailed model of the distribution network has
been created in ETAP.

A considerable part of the load is due to air conditioning

(A/C) systems and in general the load reaches its maximum
between noon and 16:00 h in summer. This type of load can
reach 65 per cent of the total load during summer and since
the AC systems are motor-driven, this reduces the power
factor (PF) of the total load to approximately 0.85. The
minimum load is equal to about 30% of summer peak load.
The following conditions of each consumer load in the
network will be considered in this research:
1- Extreme load (based on the maximum capacity of
customer circuit breaker)
2- Peak load (Maximum Summer load)
3- Normal load (Annual Average load)
4- Light load (30% of peak load)
B. PV Generators
PV generators are connected to the grid through powerelectronic inverters. The current generation of PV inverters
operate at unity power factor. So, their behavior during steady
state is similar to that of a Synchronous Generator (SG) with
unity power factor. Therefore, a SG with unity power factor is
used in ETAP to represent the PV generator.
Since in this research Building Integrating photovoltaic
(BIPV) system will be used to address the effect of such

system on voltage regulation, the available roof area of the

selected buildings must be known. The averaage available roof
area for PV installation on houses in a residenntial area is about
100m . This figure comes from about 29 different designs of
residential houses in Saudi Arabia.
The solar radiation data for this study hhas been obtained
from King Abdul-Aziz City for Science and Technology
(KACST) which has 40 stations around the ccountry recording
the solar radiation every 5 minutes. The montthly average solar
radiation that was recorded at Jeddah meteorology station for
year 2002 is shown in Fig. 4.
Average daily Solar Radiation
Jan
Max Radiation

Voltage profile ( Light load, Max

x PV&0% tap)

Feb
Mar
Apr

Minimum Midday
Radiation

May
Jun
Jul
Aug

No Radiation

Sep
Oct
Nov

8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Dec

Time (hour)
Fig 4. Monthly average solar radiation, Jedddah 2002.

Fig. 4 shows clearly the large amount oof solar radiation

between 9:00 to 15:00 throughout the yeaar with minimum
value of 400 W/m^2 and maximum valuee of about 1000
W/m^2.
In this study, concentrating PV modules (CPV) with 40%
efficiency has been assumed. Also, a 90% efficiency of the
inverter is considered in designing the PV ggenerator in order
to increase the penetration level. The output power of the PV
generator which will be delivered to the customer or the
network can be estimated as:
(6)

Based on the previous information and bby using (6), the

range of power that can be generated using concentrating PV
system between 9:00 to 15:00 for each single house is
between 14.4 kW to 36 kW. So, the followiing conditions for
PV will be considered in this research:
1- Max PV = 36 kW
2- Minimum midday PV = 14.4 kW
3- No PV
IV. IMPACT OF PV ON PRESENT VOLTAG
GE CONTROL
At each branch of Fig. 2 the voltage leveel is regulated by
the AVR, which estimates the voltage drop oover the branch by
measuring the branch current at the mainn substation end.
However, this method assumes that the poweer is unidirectional
from the main substation bus (where the AVR is located)
flowing to the end of the branch. The preseence of GCPV on
feeders makes the power flow bi-directionaal, and if the PVs
connected to feeders are carrying most or alll the branch load,
then the voltage profile along the feeders deepends mainly on

Voltage % of Nominal

Solar Radiation(W/m^2)

1100
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

the PVs location, power generated, and the PV power factor.

This creates an unpredictable and un
ncontrolled situation where
the voltage level of all nodes migh
ht or might not be within
acceptable limits. To illustrate such a problem, consider one of
the worse scenarios at light load and
a maximum PV. In this
case the PVs, connected to feeders along
a
ISK11 in Fig. 2, are
carrying the most of the branch lo
oad. The current flowing
from the LTCT will be very low. The AVR will therefore
assume that the branch load is at thee minimum level; hence it
will adjust its voltage level to 1.0
00 p.u. (0% Tap). Fig. 5
shows the voltage profile of each feeeder in this case.
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94

I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
I8
I9
Upper limit

Lower Limit
3
4
5
6
Customer Nodes
Fig. 5.Voltage profile of all feeders co
onnected to ISK11 branch.

nventional voltage control

It can be concluded that the con
technique cannot properly adjust th
he voltage level of feeders
with various PVs connected to them
m, since it depends mainly
on measuring the branch current att the main substation end,
which is no longer a good indication of the feeder status.
Therefore, a new technique must be developed to facilitate the
L
for safe integration,
coordination between PVs and the LTCT
larger penetration and better voltage control.
A
V. SCENARIOS AND ASSUMPTION
In order to proof that the adjusttment of the LTC only is
sufficient to keep the voltage level along
a
the branch within the
permissible level, the system hass been simulated for all
possible scenarios of load con
nditions, PV status and
combinations. It has been assumed that
t
the PVs are connected
to each node in the system with equal power. Also, the load is
assumed to be same for all houses. However, to make the
scenarios more realistic a further 3 random conditions of the
load feeders are also considered.
The standard deviation for all vo
oltage nodes in the system
from the nominal is used to determine the best possible
position of LTC (-5.0% to +5.0% in
n 0.5% steps). However, in
order to reduce the number of tap ch
hanging operations the best
results are rounded to the nearestt preferred position of (5.0%,-2.5%,0%,+2.5%,+5%). This will
w increase the life time
for the tap changer and reduce the disturbances
d
in the system
due to changing the LTC setting. Table
T
II shows the results
for all scenarios.
The worse cases are shown in Fiig. 6, and Fig. 7, together
with the preferred position of tap chaanger.
The simulations show that both best
b and preferred position
for all scenarios improve the voltag
ge level and keep it within
the allowable limits for all customerss in the branch.

TABLE II

VI. FUZZY LOGIC CONTROL

ALNPV

Average

No

98.19

+22.0%

+2.5%

ALAPV

Average

Min

100.12

00.0%

0.0%

ALMPV

Average

Max

102.71

-22.5%

-2.5%

XLNPV

Extreme

No

94.39

+55.0%

+5.0%

XLAPV

Extreme

Min

96.51

+33.5%

+2.5%

XLMPV

Extreme

Max

99.33

+00.5%

0.0%

LLNPV

Light

No

99.56

+00.5%

0.0%

LLAPV

Light

Min

101.43

-11.5%

-2.5%

LLMPV

Light

Max

103.94

-44.0%

-5.0%

NLMPV

No

Max

104.35

-44.5%

-5.0%

PLNPV

Peak

No

96.32

+33.5%

+5.0%

PLAPV

Peak

Min

98.34

+22.0%

+2.5%

PLMPV

Peak

Max

101.04

-11.0%

0.0%

R1LNPN

Random1

No

97.48

+22.5%

+2.5%

R1LAPV

Random1

Min

99.44

+00.5%

0.0%

R1LMPV

Random1

Max

102.07

-22.0%

-2.5%

R2LNPV

Random2

No

96.92

+33.0%

+2.5%

R2LAPV

Random2

Min

98.91

+11.0%

0.0%

R2LMPV

Random2

Max

101.58

-11.5%

-2.5%

R3LNPV

Random3

No

97.33

+22.5%

+2.5%

R3LAPV

Random3

Min

99.31

+00.5%

0.0%

R3LMPV

Random3

101.95

-22.0%

-2.5%

( Extreme load, No PV & +5% tap)

106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94

Voltage % of Nominal

Max

I1

Fuzzy Logic Control (FLC) offers an alternative to

conventional controllers when theree is no available accurate
model of the system to be controlled
d. By suitable selection of
input-output linguistic variables and a rule base, a broad range
of desirable control outcomes caan be achieved. Possible
features might include user-specified
d overall control 'tightness'
analogous to a control range, closer adherence to set point
conditions if desired, and the ability
y to explicitly set the tradeoff between energy costs and inteerior environment. Fuzzy
logic controllers consist of a set of
o linguistic control rules
based on fuzzy implications and th
he rules of inference. By
providing an algorithm, they conv
vert the linguistic control
strategy based on expert knowledgee into an automatic control
strategy [5]. Just as fuzzy logic caan be described simply as
"computing with words rather than
n numbers" fuzzy control
can be described simply as "control with sentences rather than
equations". Therefore, in contrast to
o mathematical models or
other expert systems, fuzzy logiic controllers allow the
representation of imprecise human
n knowledge in a logical
way, with approximate terms and values,
v
rather than forcing
the use of precise statements and exact
e
values, thus making
them more robust, more compact, an
nd simpler [6].
1st Implementation of FLC
Fig. 8 shows the straight forward application of fuzzy logic
controller based on the numerical solution for the preferred tap
changer position at each scenario. This control system is
simulated in MATLAB software. The
T controller consists of
one input, the average customer vo
oltage, and one output, the
preferred tap changer setting.

All customers voltages

BEST & PREFERRED POSITION OF TAP CHANGER FOR

R ALL SCENARIOS
Average
Scenario
Load
PV
B
Best
Preferred
V(p.u.)

Centralized
system

+5.0%
+2.5%

Avr V

Fuzzy Logic
Controller

Tap position

0.0%
-2.5%

Average Voltage

+5.0%

I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
I8
I9

Fig. 8. 1st Implementatiion of FLC

1) The membership of input and output

o
signals:
Input: Average voltage (AvgV) of alll customers in the branch;
Very High (VH), High (H), Normal (N), Low (L) and Very
Low (VL) as shown in Fig.9.

Upper limit
Lower Limit

Voltage % of Nominal

Customer Nodes
Fig. 6. Voltage profile of XLNPV scenario with prefferred position of tap

( Light load, Max PV & -5%tap)

106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94

I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
I8
I9
Upper limit
Lower Limit

3
4
5
6
Customer Nodes
Fig. 7. Voltage profile of LLMPV scenario with preferrred position of tap

Input variable Avg

gV

Fig. 9. Input membership function for 1st implementation of FLC

Output: Tap changer setting (TC); Very

V
High (VH), High (H),
Normal (N), Low (L) and Very low (VL) as shown in Fig.10.

TABLE IV
POWER FLOW MEASUREMENTS @ ISK11 FOR
F
SCENARIOS USING ETAP

mentation of FLC
Fig. 10. Output membership function for 1st implem

2) The control rules:

TABLE III
RULE TABLE FOR 1ST IMPLEMENTATION O
OF FLC
Input: AvgV
VH
H
N
L
VL
Output: TC
VL
L
N
H
VH

Tap changer Setting

Fig. 11 shows the difference between the numerically

calculated and proposed FLC setting for the ttap changer.
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
-1%
-2%
-3%
-4%
-5%

Numerical
Fuzzy

94

95

96

97

98

99 100 101 102 103 104 1055

Average Costomer voltages

Fig. 11. Numerical and Fuzzy Logic settingg for LTC

The FLC gives almost the same results as the numerical

solutions. The small differences in Fig. 9 aree because the full
range of variation in average voltage is not used in the
numerical calculation (scenarios only). The m
main advantage of
this way of control is that it is independent oof branch and line
parameters and can be applied to various tyypes of networks.
However, it needs the installation of a digital voltmeter at each
customer to send the voltage values to a centrralized system via
a communication network. This makees this solution
prohibitively expensive. Also, if all requiirements for this
method are available, there are many techniqques other than FL
can be used based on look-up tables for thee average voltage
and then set the preferred tap changer possition which may
does not give any advantages of using FLC.
B. 2nd Implementation of FLC
In order to find a better solution than prevviously introduced
for controlling the voltage in the branch without using a
communication network and take advantaage of the FLC
features, the correlation between the local measurements in
the system and the preferred setting have to be established
based on engineering sense. Table IV shows the
measurements of active power (P) and reacttive power (Q) at
ISK11. It is quite clear that there is a poositive correlation
between the load of the branch and the reactiive power flow at
ISK11. So, as the load increases the reactivee power increases
and vice versa. On the other hand therre is a negative
correlation between the PV generation and the active power
flow at ISK11. According to the new relationnships, the system
in Fig. 12 can be set up.

Scenario

P@ISK11(kW)

Q@ISK1
11(kVar)

Preferred tap

ALNPV

805

479

+2.5%

ALAPV

-915

486

0.0%

ALMPV

-3382

638

-2.5%

XLNPV

2444

1549

+5.0%

XLAPV

-670

1480

+2.5%

XLMPV

-1859

1540

0.0%

LLNPV

200

99

0.0%

LLAPV

-1502

130

-2.5%

LLMPV

-3946

315

-5.0%

NLMPV

-4134

208

-5.0%

PLNPV

1619

1004

+5.0%

PLAPV

-127

974

+2.5%

PLMPV

-2624

1082

0.0%

R1LNPN

1122

691

+2.5%

R1LAPV

-609

683

0.0%

R1LMPV

-3088

818

-2.5%

R2LNPV

1327

824

+2.5%

R2LAPV

-411

805

0.0%

R2LMPV

-2899

927

-2.5%

R3LNPV

1168

720

+2.5%

R3LAPV

-565

709

0.0%

R3LMPV

-3046

841

-2.5%
+5.0%
+2.5%

P @ ISK11
Q @ ISK11

Fuzzy Logic
Controller

Tap position
0.0%
-2.5%
+5.0%

Fig. 12. Fuzzy Logic controllerr implementation 2

where:
1) The membership of input and output
o
signals:
Input1: Reactive power (Q) @ ISK11; extreme and peak
load high Q (HL), average load medium Q (ML) and
light load light Q (LL) as shown in
n Fig.13.

Fig. 13. Input membership function 1 forr 2nd implementation of FLC

Input2: Active power (P) @ ISK11; no PV high P (NoPV),

Minimum PV medium P (MinPV)) and maximum Power
light P (MaxPV) as shown in Fig.14.

mentation of FLC
Fig. 14. Input membership function 2 for 2nd implem

Output: Tap changer setting (TC); Very Highh (VH), High (H),
Normal (N), Low (L), Very low (VL) as show
wn in Fig.15.

The first implementation is asssociated with significant

costs due to hardware cost and the need to widespread
communication infrastructure but itt can be applied to many
networks since it is independent on the
t network parameters.
The second implementation sho
ows a novel technique to
control the LTCT based on the pow
wer flow information at the
transformer itself. The main advantaage of this implementation
is that all measurements are taken lo
ocally and there is no need
for remote communication with other
o
information in the
system. However, the main drawbacck of this method is that it
depends on the network paraameters and the load
characteristics. So, for each network
k the FLC need to be set up
based on analysis of the network load
l
data. In general, the
results are encouraging and warrant further investigation using
the fuzzy logic concept in such problems.
VIII. REFEREN
NCES
[1]

Fig. 15. Output membership function for 2nd implem

mentation of FLC

[2]

2) The control rules:

TABLE V
OF FLC
RULE TABLE FOR 2ND IMPLEMENTATION O
PPV
Max PV
No PV
Min PV
QLoad
HL
VH
H
N
ML
H
N
L
LL
N
L
VL

Fig. 16 shows the tap changer settings for poossible range of P

and Q using the proposed FLC.

Tap changer setting

5.0%
2.5%
0.0%
2010
470
-1070

-2.5%

1400

-4150
1550

950

1250

Reactive Power Q(kVar)

1100

650

800

350

[4]
[5]
[6]

The authors would like to thanks KACST for providing the

solar irradiance data, and SEC-WR main office in Jeddah for
providing the utility grid data.
HIES
X. BIOGRAPH

-2610
500

50

200

-5.0%

[3]

Davis, W. Murray, Distributed Resourrce Electric Power Systems Offer

Significant Advantages Over Central Station Generation and T&D
o the IEEE Power Engineering
Power Systems Part I, Proceedings of
Society Transmission and Distribution
n Conference, Vol. 1, Jul 21-25
2002, pp. 54-61.
Davis, Murray W., Distributed Resourrce Electric Power Systems Offer
Significant Advantages Over Central Station Generation and T&D
Power Systems Part II, Proceedings of
o the IEEE Power Engineering
Society Transmission and Distribution
n Conference, Vol. 1, Jul 21-25
2002, pp 62-69.
H.B. Puttgen, P.R. MacGregor, F.C. Laambert, Distributed Generation:
Semantic Hype or the Dawn of a New
N
Era?, Power and Energy
Magazine, IEEE Vol. 1, Issue 1, Jan-Feb 2003, pp. 22 29.
N. Jenkins, R. Allan, P. Crossley, D. Kirrschen, and G. Strbac, Embedded
generation: The Institution of Electricall Engineers, London , UK, 1995.
C.C. Lee, "Fuzzy Logic in Control Sy
ystems: Fuzzy Logic Controller,
Parts I & II," IEEE Transactions on Sysstems, Man and Cybernetics, Vol.
20, No. 2, March/April 1990, pp. 404-43
35.
A.I. Dounis, M. Bruant, M. Santamou
uris, G. Guaraccino, P. Michel,
"Comparison of conventional and fuzzy
y control of indoor of indoor air
quality in buildings,", Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 1996,
pp.131-140
IX. ACKNOWLED
DGMENT

Fig. 16. Fuzzy Logic set for LTC based on powerr flow @ ISK11

The controller gives the preferred tap chaanger position for

all scenarios when the values of P and Q value of each
scenario have been used as an input to the this system. The
key benefit of this implementation is that all m
measurements are
taken locally and there is no need for remotee communication.
This makes this solution simple and cheapp compared with
other control technique. In order to optimizee this solution, the
membership for the input has to be tuned byy determining the
preferred position numerically for the poweer flow values in
the transition region.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
Two methods of implementation the oof a fuzzy logic
controller for setting the tap changer positioon in distribution
network were investigated in this paper. It haas been found that
both proposed FLCs have the ability to impprove the voltage
profile of distribution network and keepp it within the
permissible limits.

Raed A. Shalwala
a received the B.S. degree from
King AbdulAziz Un
niversity, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia,
in 2002 and the M.S.
M
degree from University of
Nottingham, Nottin
ngham, U.K., in 2006, both in
electrical engineerin
ng. He is currently pursuing the
Ph.D. degree at Un
niversity of Leicester, Leicester,
U.K.
His research interessts are in power system planning
and operation, ren
newable energy resources and
distribution network
k.
Johannes (Hans) Bleijs
B
received his MSc degree in
Electrical and Electronic
E
Engineering from
Eindhoven Univeersity of Technology, The
Netherlands, in 198
82. In 1983 he joined Imperial
College in London as
a a Research Associate working
on integration off wind turbines with diesel
generators. He wass awarded a PhD degree from
Imperial College in 1990. Since 1991 he has been a
Lecturer in Electricaal Engineering in the Department
of Engineering at th
he University of Leicester, where
he teaches Electrical Machines and Power Systems. His field of research
covers a wide range of subjects in Renewablee Energy Conversion and Energy
Storage, from electrical generators and pow
wer electronics to power systems
and advanced controllers.