Small-Signal Modeling of a Three-Phase

Isolated Inverter with Both Voltage and

Frequency Droop Control
Md. Rasheduzzaman Jacob Mueller Jonathan W. Kimball
Student Member, IEEE Student Member, IEEE Senior Member, IEEE
mr6x7@mst.edu jam8z4@mst.edu kimballjw@mst.edu

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

Missouri University of Science and Technology
Rolla, Missouri 65409

Abstract— In conventional power system operation, droop
control methods are used to facilitate load sharing among
different generation sources. This method compensates for both
active and reactive power imbalances by adjusting the output
voltage magnitude and frequency of the generating unit. Both P-
ω and Q-V droops have been used in synchronous machines for
decades. Similar droop controllers were used in this study to
develop a control algorithm for a three-phase isolated (islanded)
inverter. Controllers modeled in a synchronous dq reference
frame were simulated in PLECS and validated with the
hardware setup. A small-signal model based on an averaged
model of the inverter was developed to study the system’s
dynamics. The accuracy of this mathematical model was then
verified using the data obtained from the experimental and
simulation results. This validated model is a useful tool for the
further dynamic analysis of a microgrid.
I. INTRODUCTION
Voltage source converters (VSC) have become
increasingly popular with the introduction of modern power
generating units such as wind and solar power plants. As these
new energy sources lack the inherent ability to generate 60 Hz
AC, VSCs are required to process their nonsynchronous
signals and ensure proper sinusoidal voltage waveforms
whose magnitudes equal that of the main grid. To facilitate the
integration of modern generation sources into the existing
distribution infrastructure, tools must be developed to aid in
the analysis and design of the VSCs that interface these
sources to the grid. In autonomous power system operation,
these VSCs are primarily connected to the distribution side in
parallel so that they can share a common load among
themselves, irrespective of the plant parameters [1], in the
absence of the main grid. A common technique used for load
sharing is known as droop control. Droop controllers have
been used successfully for quite some time in the control of
synchronous machines. An attempt was made to simulate such
a controller for an inverter [2] using the conventional P-ω and
Q-V droops. However, the transient response of the inverter
output was not verified with any laboratory results. Simulation
results for autonomous operation of a single-phase inverter
were presented in [3]. Experimental results were published in
[4] discussing only the steady-state behaviors of the system.
A small-signal model has been developed for such converters
in [5] but this model ignored the output filter dynamics. A
different type of control algorithm was presented in [6] using a
small-signal modeling approach, but it neglected the effect of
damping resistors in the LCL filter. Additionally, no phase-
locked loop (PLL) was used to observe the system’s frequency
during transients and there was a significant amount of
reactive power mismatch between the small signal model’s
prediction and the experiment result.
To overcome these issues, an isolated three phase inverter
with conventional P-ω and Q-V droop controllers was
simulated and a small signal model derived. This paper
documents the development and verification of this model in
the following structure. First, an overview of the proposed
control structure is given as block diagram. A set of nonlinear
equations are then derived from their respective controller
blocks and are linearized around their appropriate operating
points. To simulate the effect of a load perturbation, a
switched system arrangement is used. Finally, the transient
response predicted by the mathematical model is verified
against both simulation and experimental results. The
proposed model is intended to serve as a building block for
control of more complex systems of modern distributed
generation sources.
II. OVERVIEW OF THE SYSTEM
The isolated (islanded) inverter system under consideration
is shown as Figure 1. The inverter is connected to the inverter
bus through a filter. Variable passive loads are connected to
the bus as well. For the simplicity of the system, nonlinear
loads are not considered.

Figure 1. An isolated inverter connected to a load

978-1-4799-2325-0/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE 1008

 Figure 2. Block diagram of the inverter controllers

While the proposed system can operate in either grid III. SYSTEM MODELING IN STATE SPACE FORM
connected mode or as an autonomous system, only the
autonomous operation will be considered in this paper. In A. Nonlinear Equations of the Inverter Model
autonomous operation, the inverter is controlled using the In this section, controllers that are shown using blocks in
droop control method. An individual inverter control
Figure 2 are analyzed and expressed in terms of mathematical
algorithm is depicted in Figure 2. The output of the inverter is
equations. These equations are non-linear when developed
passed through an LC filter to reject the high frequency
switching effects. The filtered voltage and current thus need to be linearized around an operating point to study
measurements are then converted to d-q axis components the system dynamics.
using an abc to dq transformation. The inverter’s output power 1) Average Power Calculation: The d-q axis output
is calculated based on these measurements. voltage and current measurements are used to calculate the
instantaneous active and reactive power coming out of the
The calculated power is passed through a low pass filter
inverter. These power measurements are done using (1) and
and sent to the droop controllers, which generate voltage and
frequency references. Along with frequency, the P-ω droop (2) respectively.
3
will also generate the reference angle. All conversions p   vod iod  voq ioq  (1)
between abc and dq reference frames are done using this 2
reference angle. Voltage and frequency references are then
compared with the measured voltage and frequency.
3
Frequency is measured by forcing the d axis component of the
voltage to zero in a dq based PLL. 2
 voqiod  vod ioq 
q (2)

The error signals obtained by comparing the reference and Instantaneous powers are then passed through low pass
measured values are passed through PI controllers to generate filters with the corner frequency ωc to obtain the average
the d-q axis component references for the current flowing output power.
through the output filter inductor. These reference current c
signals are then compared with the corresponding measured P p
output filter currents and are passed through another set of PI s  c
controllers to produce d-q axis voltage references. These sP   Pc  1.5c  vod iod  voq ioq  (3)
voltage values appear across the input of the LC filter. A
coupling inductor is used after the LC filter to connect the c
inverter to the bus. A resistor in series with the filter capacitor Q q
ensures the proper damping of the resonant frequency s  c
associated with the output filter. sQ  Qc  1.5c  voq iod  vod ioq  (4)
All the controllers and filters are modeled in the individual
inverter reference frame corresponding to the reference 2) Droop Controllers: In grid connected mode, the
frequency set by the P-ω droop controller. Inverter dynamics inverter’s output voltage is set by the grid voltage magnitude.
are influenced by the output filter, the coupling inductor, A phase locked loop ensures proper tracking of grid phase so
average power calculation, PLL, droop controllers, and that inverter output remains synchronized to the grid. During
voltage and current controllers. The overall system dynamics stand-alone (or islanded) operation, the inverter does not have
include those of the individual inverter and the load. the these externally generated reference signals. As a result,

1009
the inverter must generate its own voltage frequency and sq  Voq*  Voq
magnitude references using the droop equations. The P-ω and
Q-V droop equations [7] are the two well-known equations ilq*  kiv q  k pv sq (9)
that are used for generating these references. Figure 3 shows 5) Current Controllers: PI controllers are again used for
the characteristics of these droop curves. the current controllers. These controllers takes the difference
between the commanded filter inductor current (ildq*) and the
ω V
measured filter inductor current (ildq), and produces a
ω1 V1
V2
commanded voltage value (vidq*) corresponding to the
ω2
inverter output voltage before the LC filter. Cross coupling
component terms are included in this controller as well.
P Q
P1 P2 Q1 Q2

1  2 V1  V2
m n
P2  P1 Q2  Q1
Figure 3. Droop curves Figure 6. Current controllers

*  n  mP s d  ild *  ild
vid *  n L f ilq  kic  d  k pc s d
s *  n  mP (5) (10)
s q  ilq  ilq
*

Voq*  Voq , n  nQ (6)

3) Phase Locked Loop: In order to measure the actual
frequency of the system a PLL is required. A d-q based PLL
is chosen in our case [8]. The PLL input is the d axis
component of the voltage measured across the filter capacitor.
Therefore, the phase is locked such that Vod = 0.
viq*  n L f ild  kic  q  k pc s q (11)
6) LC Filter and Coupling Inductor: The output filter and
coupling inductor used are shown in Figure 7. Without any
major inaccuracies, we can assume that the commanded
voltage (vidq*) appears across the input of the filter inductor
i.e. vidq* = vidq. The series resistances of the inductors are also
taken into consideration, and a damping resistor Rd is
connected in series with the filter capacitor. The capacitor’s
ESR is not considered, as it can be lumped into Rd.

Figure 4. d-q based PLL

s pll  vod
 pll  377  k p vod  ki pll (7)
4) Voltage Controllers: The reference frequency and
Figure 7. Output filter with coupling inductor
magnitude generated using the droop equations are used as
set point values for the voltage controllers. Standard PI The state equations governing the filter dynamics are
controllers are used for this purpose. The process variables shown below.
are the actual measurements of the inverter q axis voltage 1
(Voq) and the angular frequency (ω) from the PLL. sild 
Lf
 rf ild  vid  vod    *ilq (12)

1
silq 
Lf
 rf ilq  viq  voq    *ild (13)

1
siod   rc iod  vod  vbd    *ioq (14)
Lc
1
 rc ioq  voq  vbq    *iod
Figure 5. Voltage controllers
sioq  (15)
Lc
sd  *   pll
1
ild*  kivd  k pv s d (8)
svod   ild  iod    *voq  Rd s(ild  iod ) (16)
Cf

1010
 1
svoq 
Cf
 ilq  ioq   *vod  Rd s(ilq  ioq ) (17)

B. Nonlinear Load Equations

The loads for this system are R-L loads. Their
configuration is given in Figure 8. Equations describing this
arrangement are as follows:
1
siloadD    Rload iloadD  vbD    *iloadQ (18)
Figure 9. Virtual resistor at inverter bus
Lload vbD  rn  ioD ,i  iloadD ,i  (23)
vbQ  rn  ioQ ,i  iloadQ ,i 
1
siloadQ   R i
load loadQ
 vbQ    iloadD
*
(19) (24)
Lload and its equations are derived in terms of that reference. A
transformation is required to go from local to global reference
frame and vice versa. This transformation is show graphically
in Figure 10. Note the difference in subscript capitalization,
which denotes whether the quantity is defined in the local or
global reference frame.

Figure 8. Load configuration

C. Linearized Model of the Inverter and Load

There are 16 states and 16 nonlinear equations that
describe the system’s dynamics. These nonlinear equations Figure 10. Reference frame transformations
are linearized around some operating points and a state space For a single inverter single bus system, the inverter’s local
equation of the form (20) is generated using Matlab® reference frame can be set to the same as that of the global
symbolic math toolbox. reference frame. Mathematically this can be done by setting
the angle difference between the local and global reference
x  Ax  Bu (20)
frames (θ) to zero. This translation between reference frames
The states for this system are: will have greater significance when multiple inverters are
added to the system. The following equations are used for
x  [; P; Q; d ; q ;  d ; q ; ild ; ilq ; vod ; voq ; iod ; ioq ; pll ;iloadD;iloadQ ] (21) reference frame transformations [9].
 fD   cos  sin    f d 
And the inputs are defined as: f     (25)
 Q   sin  cos    f q 
u  [vbD ; vbQ ] (22) global local

 fd  cos   sin    f D 
f    
cos    fQ 
D. Virtual Resistance Method (26)
 q local  sin  global
Since this is an autonomous system, the system does not
have an input that will reflect the perturbation effect. The This transformation is used to refer the virtual resistor
only perturbation that occurs comes from the step change in equations (23) and (24) that are defined in the global
load. As a result a method is needed to include the terms reference frame to the local reference frame. The equations
relating to the bus voltages into the ‘A’ matrix. This and reference frame transformation can then be linearized and
effectively translates the inputs defined in (22) to states. To included in the symbolic ‘A’ matrix, which describes the
do this, a virtual resistor with high resistance can be assumed entire autonomous system including the loads. This matrix,
to be connected at the inverter bus. This resistor (rn) has a ‘Asys’, describes the system in state space form:
negligible impact on system dynamics. Using KVL one can x  Asys x (27)
express the equations describing the bus voltage in terms of
IV. EVALUATION OF THE MATHEMATICAL MODEL
the inverter and load currents. This is shown in (23) and (24).
E. Reference Frame Transformation The autonomous system described by matrix ‘Asys’ needs
to be linearized around some operating points. There are two
It is assumed that the inverter bus serves as the system’s ways of finding these operating points. One is to set the
reference, and consequently is labeled the global reference nonlinear state equations to zero and the other is to simulate
frame. The inverter operates in its own local reference frame

1011
the averaged model in PLECS. Both methods were used and
produced same result.
x  0 (28)
A1* u
Initially load ‘a’ in Figure 8 is connected to the inverter
bus. Operating points are determined for that load. Using these 1
X1' >= 0.5
load values, the controller gains listed in Table I, and the s

system parameters listed in Table II, steady state operating

points or initial conditions for the corresponding states are A2* u
obtained. This operating point is shown in (29). A separate set
of operating points is determined after applying another RL X2'
load to simulate a load perturbation. Rload2 and Lload2 are added
in parallel to load ‘a’, and a new set of operating points for the
equivalent load impedance are obtained. This operating point Figure 11. Small signal simulation in Simulink
is shown in (30). The dynamic response when changing
between these two operating points yields the mathematical V. EXPERIMENT SETUP AND SIMULATIONS
model’s prediction for a load step change transient. In order to validate the results of the mathematical model,
Figure 11 shows the small signal model evaluation the dynamic response is compared against those of a
arrangement in Simulink. Using the gains and system simulation and experiment in hardware. The schematic of the
parameters in Table I and Table II, matrices ‘A1’ and ‘A2’ are simulation is shown in Figure 12. This averaged model of the
obtained through linearization around operating points (29) system is perturbed through a load change as discussed in the
and (30), respectively. previous sections. In hardware implementation, a Texas
Instruments TMS320F28335 digital signal processor was
TABLE I. used to apply the control system to a 10 kW inverter built
around an Infineon BSM30GP60 IGBT module. A dc source
Controller Gains was connected directly to the dc link and the three phase
PI controller for Parameter Value outputs were connected to the loads. Space vector modulation
Kpv 0.01 was used as the switching scheme at a frequency of 10 kHz.
Voltage controllers The experimental results collected correspond to the actual
Kiv 0.1 values in the DSP, which were logged in real time. This was
Kpc 0.1 accomplished through transmission of the required values
Current controllers over serial connections to a host computer, as the internal
Kic 10,000 storage capacity of the DSP was not sufficient to save the
Kp 0.01 large volumes of data generated by the logs. In the same way
PLL as in the simulation, the system was perturbed by manually
Ki 100 switching between load configurations and logging the
dynamic response. Figure 13 shows the experimental setup,
TABLE II. including sensors and circuit board, output filter, and load
System Parameters and Initial Conditions configuration.
Parameter Value Parameter Value
Lf 4.2mH rf 0.6Ω
Lc 0.5mH rc 0.5Ω
Cf 15μf Rd 1.873Ω
1/1000rad/
m n 1/1000V/Var
Ws
ωc 62.8rads-1 ωn 377rads-1
ω0 376.14rads-1 δ 0
rn 1000Ω Voq,n 170 V Figure 12. Average model simulation in Plecs

Rload1 50Ω Lload1 15mH

Rload2 50Ω Lload2 7.5mH

X1 = [0 844.526 97.31 -5.76717 33.2358 0 0.0171567 -0.57613

3.32359 0 169.903 0.381829 3.31376 0.0615547 0.381829 3.31376]; (29)

X2 = [0 1268 111.9 -5.19055 49.6897 0 0.0172354 -0.519075 4.9692 (30)

0 169.866 0.438195 4.95938 0.057861 0.438195 4.95938];

1012
 Vodexp Voqexp
5 180

Vod (V)

Voq (V)
0 160
-5 140
-10 120
0 2 4 0 2 4
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
Vodsim Voqsim
5 180

Vod (V)

Voq (V)
0 160
-5 140
-10 120
0 2 4 0 2 4
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
Vodmodel Voqmodel
5 180

Vod (V)

Voq (V)
0 160
-5 140
Figure 13. Experiment setup -10 120
0 2 4 0 2 4
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
A comparison of the small signal model prediction, Figure 15. Comparison of d-q axis output voltages
simulation results, and experimental results are shown in
Comparison of dq axis output voltages shows switching
Figure 14 through Figure 18. In all figures, the top graphs are
ripple in the experimental results which is not present either
from the small signal model, middle graphs are from the
in simulation or mathematical result. This is because both the
simulation, and lower graphs are from hardware
averaged and small signal models do not include converter
implementation. The load perturbation occurs at t = 1s.
switching action.
P exp Qexp iodexp
Reactive Power (var)

ioqexp
1400 120
Real Power (watt)

6
1200 100
0.4 5
iod(A)

1000
ioq(A)

80
800 4
0.2
600 60
0 2 4 0 2 4 3
0 2 4 0 2 4
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
P sim Qsim
iodsim
Reactive Power (var)

ioqsim
1400 120
Real Power (watt)

0.6 6
1200 100
0.4 5
iod (A)

1000
ioq (A)

80
800 4
0.2
600 60
0 2 4 0 2 4 3
0 2 4 0 2 4
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
P model Qmodel
iodmodel
Reactive Power (var)

ioqmodel
1400 120
Real Power (watt)

0.6 6
1200 100
0.4 5
iod (A)

1000
ioq (A)

80
800 4
0.2
600 60
0 2 4 0 2 4 3
0 2 4 0 2 4
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
Figure 14. Comparison of active and reactive power Figure 16. Comparison of d-q axis inverter output currents

1013
 iLqexp
value after a load perturbation in the system. The frequency
iLdexp
of the system is recorded in rad/s and shows the actual
0 variation during transient response, as opposed to the
5
reference values generated by the P-ω droop controller. High

iLq(A)
iLd(A)

-0.5 4 frequency switching ripple can not be completely avoided,

and are visible in the experimental results for Vod, Iod, Ild, Ilq
3 and ω.  A slight  rounding effect is noticeable in the P and Q
0 2 4 0 2 4 graphs. This is attributable to the sample averaging done in
T ime (sec) T ime (sec) the DSP as a part of the the real-time data logging process.
iLdsim iLqsim
The eigenvalues for ‘A1’ are listed in Table III. The
0
5 negative real part of the eigenvalues signifies the linearized
system’s stability. A participation factor analysis showed that
iLq (A)
iLd (A)

-0.5 4 the first two eigenvalues are related to the d-q axis
components of the load current. Of all the eigenvalues, these
3 two will be the furthest into the left-half plane if plotted in the
0 2 4 0 2 4
‘s’ domain. The high value of the virtual resistor results in
T ime (sec) T ime (sec)
such large eigenvalues. As a result, they will have little effect
iLdmodel iLqmodel
on system dynamics if perturbed. Figure 19 plots the other
0 eigenvalues, which are closer to the jω axis and have more
5
effect during the transient response. Eigenvalues 3 to 8 are
iLq (A)
iLd (A)

4
largely influenced by the voltage controllers, current
-0.5 controllers, and the LCL filter. An individual eigenvalue
3 sensitivity analysis shows that eigenvalues that are related to
0 2 4 0 2 4 voltage controllers and P are more sensitive to uncertainities
T ime (sec) T ime (sec) in ‘A1’compared to the others.
Figure 17. Comparison of d-q axis filter inductor currents
TABLE III.
 exp
Eigenvalues of the System Matrix
380
No. Real (1/s) Im(rad/s)
 (rad/s)

370 1 -20671442.22 376.21

2 -20671442.22 -376.21
360
0 1 2 3 4 3 -560.92 4722.26
T ime (sec) 4 -4722.26
-560.92
 sim
380
5 -487.34 4354.84
6 -487.34 -4354.84
 (rad/s)

370
7 -2687.05 352.59
360 8 -2687.05 -352.59
0 1 2 3 4
T ime (sec) 9 -263.32 0
 model
10 -112.00 0
380
11 -3.42 0
 (rad/s)

370
12 -13.31 0
360
0 1 2 3 4 13 3.93
-63.02
T ime (sec)
14 -63.02 -3.93
Figure 18. Comparison of system frequency
15 -62.81 0
For all signals considered, the prediction of the
mathematical model very closely resembles that found in 16 0 0
simulation and the hardware experiment, both in terms of
transient and steady state response. In contrast to [6], the
proposed small signal model reaches a proper steady state

1014
 Eigenvalues
5000
Imaginary
0
-5000
-3000 -2000 -1000
Real
Figure 19. Eigenvalue plot of A1
VII. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a small-signal model for an inverter under
droop control operation is developed. An averaged model
simulation using PLECS was used to determine stable gains
for the system. RL loads are used to create perturbation in the
system. The system behaves as a switched system where an
accurate dynamic response is found by switching from one
state matrix to another. The dynamic response of the
mathematical model is verified against the PLECS simulation
and experimental results obtained in a hardware
implementation. Apart from some high frequency switching
ripple, the results obtained from the small signal model match
the experimental results. An eigenvalue study further
indicates that the linearized system is stable. The effect of
parameter uncertainty on different eigenvalues was analyzed.
The proposed model describes the dynamics of a single
autonomous converter and can be used as a building block of
more complex systems of multiple generation sources such as
that used in a conventional droop controlled microgrid. To
this end, future work for this project includes a study of the
dynamics of a multi-inverter system operating in voltage and
frequency droop control, and an extension of the small signal
model proposed in this work to predict and analyze the
response of such a system.
REFERENCES
[1] C. K. Sao and P. W. Lehn, “Autonomous Load Sharing of Voltage
Source Converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., vol. 20, no. 2, pp.
1009–1016, Apr. 2005.
[2] A. H. Kasem Alaboudy, H. H. Zeineldin, and J. Kirtley, “Microgrid
Stability Characterization Subsequent to Fault-Triggered Islanding
Incidents,” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 658–669,
0 Apr. 2012.
[3] T. L. Vandoorn, B. Meersman, L. Degroote, B. Renders, and L.
Vandevelde, “A Control Strategy for Islanded Microgrids With DC-
Link Voltage Control,” IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., vol. 26, no. 2, pp.
703–713, Apr. 2011.
[4] Chien-Liang Chen, Yubin Wang, Jih-Sheng Lai, Yuang-Shung Lee,
and D. Martin, “Design of Parallel Inverters for Smooth Mode Transfer
Microgrid Applications,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 25, no. 1,
pp. 6–15, Jan. 2010.
[5] F. Katiraei, M. R. Iravani, and P. W. Lehn, “Small-signal dynamic
model of a micro-grid including conventional and electronically
interfaced distributed resources,” IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., vol. 1,
no. 3, p. 369, 2007.
[6] N. Pogaku, M. Prodanovic, and T. C. Green, “Modeling, Analysis and
Testing of Autonomous Operation of an Inverter-Based Microgrid,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 613–625, Mar. 2007.
[7] R. H. Lasseter, “Microgrids,” in Power Engineering Society Winter
Meeting, 2002. IEEE, 2002, vol. 1, pp. 305–308.
[8] V. Kaura and V. Blasko, “Operation of a phase locked loop system
under distorted utility conditions,” Ind. Appl. IEEE Trans., vol. 33, no.
1, pp. 58–63, 1997.
[9] P. C. Krause, “The method of symmetrical components derived by
reference frame theory,” IEEE Trans Power App Syst, vol. PAS - 104,
6, pp. 1492–1499, Jun. 1985.
1015